[MOBY-dev] [moby] Re: Cleaning up the Object ontology - Inheriting from base Object

[Martin Senger]

> I made the argument from my perspective, but I'd like your counter-
> argument to be known and clearly understood by the community.
>
   Okay, here we go:

   * I prefer to have semantics (if I accept that they can be any
semantics in computers) in the object names because they have mechanism of
inheritance and containment - while namespaces do not.

   * I made my decision also because of the lack of description how to use
namespaces at all (it was never documented).

> The two approaches to the use of the MOBY Object ontology are not
> entirely interoperable with each other
>
   I think they are, I do not see any harm to have both concepts sitting
in the same registry.

   My bottom line is: This is not a question that we need to agree on
(like asynchonous API or error handling - which *must* be accepted by any
service). I would rather advocate the principle "live and let live". But
you are right that we should to explain about the concepts we decided to
take - especially for newcomers. We have it available in the GCP CropWiki
(and if it is not yet fully up-to-date it will be in the due time).

   Martin

-- 
Martin Senger
   email: martin.senger at gmail.com
   skype: martinsenger
consulting for:
   International Rice Research Institute
   Biometrics and Bioinformatics Unit
   DAPO BOX 7777, Metro Manila
   Philippines, phone: +63-2-580-5600 (ext.2324)