Re: Re: rdf in pear .. here we go

Lukas Smith wrote: <snip>

I think perhaps we should remove the Object class, it really does nothing but get *one* method inherited and that method gets overloaded anyways.

Yeah this one could be done away with. Its just an interface .. dunno if they have elaborate plans for it though.

Yes, can you ask?

Ok here is my class tree. Remember that all underscores map to a "/" in the file system. So Foo_Bar will be Foo/Bar.php in the filesystem. Here is a class tree I quickly wipped up: Base Package: RDF

    o RDF_Object
          o RDF_Node
                o RDF_Resource
                      o RDF_BlankNode
                o RDF_Literal
          o RDF_Model
                o RDF_DbModel
                o RDF_MemModel
          o RDF_DbStore
          o RDF_Statement
          o RDF_Parser (*)
          o RDF_Serializer (*)

Subpackage: RDF_RDQL

          o RDF_RDQL_Engine
                + RDF_RDQL_DbEngine
                + RDF_RDQL_MemEngine
          o RDF_RDQL_Parser
          o RDF_RDQL_ResultIterator

Subpackage: RDF_N3

          o RDF_N3_Parser
          o RDF_N3_Serializer

Subpackage: RDF_NTriple

          o RDF_NTriple_Serializer

Subpackage: RDF_Util

          o RDF_Util

Subpackage: RDF_StatementIterator

          o RDF_StatementIterator

(*) I did not introduce an XML here because I felt this is not standard. As far as I know XML is the "default" serialization format and it is called RDF. So yes this would change the filesystem structure.

Looks nice, but can you update and put in the XML stuff after what we spoke about on IRC?

So what would be the list of changes now then? 1) clean up the code to be PEAS CS compatible - fix whitespaces, brackets etc -> code beautifier jobs (this one they would appreciate) - fix class names (this one they are willing to accept as long as it is reverseable with a script) - fix filesystem structure (this one I didn't not talk to them about, but I feel this structure would actually be more clean) 2) add PEAR Error class (this one I didn't not talk to them about, but I would assume they would welcome such a class as its not like they are scared of instantiating lots of classes)

OK! Now, what does being a subpackage entail? does it not get released on its own? If thats the case, RDF_Util at least should be its own package. - Davey