On Sunday 12 September 2004 11:53 am, Oren Ben-Kiki wrote:
> On Sunday 12 September 2004 08:52, trans. (T. Onoma) wrote:
> > Might the YAML version be better as a date since the tags are?
> > %YAML 2004
> I really hope not. It isn't as if there will be many YAML versions.
> Having one deprecated one is already pushing it.
Wondering how this relates to YAML tags. If I have a YAML tag
it translates by default to tag:yaml.org,2002:str. But if yaml's str is
updated in the future, say in 2006 (unlikely but other tags may), then that
new one will be yaml.org,2006:str. Yet those old documents need to rely on
the 2002 version to ensure compatibility. This means that the YAML 1.1
version must somehow map to the 2002 default yaml.org repository. In fact any
YAML version may need to map to any number of potentially different dated
versions of YAML types. it may be easy now b/c everyting is 2002. But in the
future that could easily get too muddled.
A cleaner way to deal with this would be just to keep the repository itself
"up with the times", so to speak. Each repository type would have a data
range such as:
yaml.org,2002..2004:str (info in repository)
As time wore on that last date would be kept in sync with the current date,
until such time that a new version might be made. Follow me?
Then if the date on the tag in the document itself falls within this date then
we know which version it is. ie. yaml.org,2002 falls into the above
repository type. By this, the default then of any YAML tag can be the YEAR
VERSION of the stream.
- !! 23 # tag:yaml.org,2004:str
> Have fun,
> Oren Ben-Kiki
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by: YOU BE THE JUDGE. Be one of 170
> Project Admins to receive an Apple iPod Mini FREE for your judgement on
> who ports your project to Linux PPC the best. Sponsored by IBM.
> Deadline: Sept. 13. Go here: http://sf.net/ppc_contest.php
> Yaml-core mailing list
( o _
/ \ transami@...
I don't give a damn for a man that can only spell a word one way.