[Biocorba-l] NS stuff

[Brad Chapman]

I propose a naming scheme like:
> > > databases.BioCorba/db_category/db_name.db_version
> > > analysis.AppLab/analysis_category/analayis_name.analysis_version

Juha:
>  That category part is where that pain starts.
>  
>  Some AppLab clients use the category for building GUI menus (there can
>  tens of applications on a same server (EMBOSS)). 

True enough. I had time to play more with AppLab and Novella this
weekend and have a better picture of how the naming schemes work.
The category does make things tougher, since you could randomly put
BLAST under Bio, BioApps, CheeseGraterAccessories or any other
category you felt like it, which makes it more difficult to find a
blast analysis category.

> If we have similar need
>  with databases then we should keep it. Or perhaps we can find better
>  solution for the navigation problem. Category is bit artificial.

Agreed. I was thinking about trying to serve both cases, but we
should just stick with what is best for each case. No category is
simpler, easier, better :-).

>  Should we have the server name (or better interface name) at the end:
>  databases.BioCorba/db_name.db_version/interface.version
>  
>  ..same database can be served through  different interfaces.

Do you mean a case like making EMBL available through both the EMBL
IDL interface and a BioCorba interface? If so, could we do this
more simply with:

database.BioCorba/EMBL.version
database.embl/EMBL.version

This way BioCorba apps only use things with database.BioCorba, and
thus we don't have to worry about having the same heirarchy between
BioCorba and everything else in the world, so embl could keep its
current heirarchy.

Any thoughts? Will something this simple work for BioCorba? Other
opinions?

Brad
-- 
PGP public key available from http://pgp.mit.edu/