Re: [Yaml-core] YAML URI scheme rough cut

[why t. l. s. <yam...@wh...>]

Clark C . Evans (cc...@cl...) wrote:
> Given the "tag:" uri as new information, and that it's very 
> close to being approved perhaps this changes things a bit.  
> This "tag:" URI has the form tag:yaml.org,2002:whatever and 
> thus is quite close to what we have already, only that we
> don't do dates.  Dates may be a good idea anyway...
> 
> If we used this instead, we could have the following mappings:
> 
>     !str                        tag:yaml.org,2002:*/str
>     !perl/$Foo::Bar             tag:yaml.org,2002:perl/$Foo::Bar
>     !java/com.clarkevans.Time   tag:yaml.org,2002:java/com.clarkevans.Time 
> 
>     !!whatever                  x-private:whatever
>     !clarkevans.com/boogle      http://clarkevans.com/boogle
>     !clarkevans.com,2002:boogle tag:clarkevans.com,2002:boogle
>     !http://clarkevans.com      http://clarkevans.com
> 
> Thus, the only thing we'd be doing is using "tag:yaml.org,2002:"
> in most places instead of "http://" as our prefix.   And most of
> the examples would change over to use "tag:" instead of "http:"

Nice work so far, Clark and Oren.

This is really a difficult decision and it's so cool that you've put in the effort
to discover the most meaningful way to address our type resources.  I think the
above is the closest to solving the issue that I've seen yet.  And I've seen the
follow-ups knocking out HTTP.  I think it's best to stick with a single addressing 
scheme.  The POG was a really cool idea, but cool in the kind of way that seemed to 
be steering away from the simple and solid intentions of YAML.

It's another feat of teamwork to see the issue plowed through so quickly and
discussed so thoroughly.  Can't wait to see this laid out completely in the spec.

_why