This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 84 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 84 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.
A few quick comments...
> Libraries Organized by Category
>
> Many popular open source library collections are organized by
> category, sometimes with subcategories within the category, and then
> libraries within the (sub)category.
I think taxonomies for classifying libraries for human location are (or
should be) more ephemeral than the universal identifiers of the
libraries themselves.
I wrote some remarks on this a few years ago:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-devel/2001-04/msg00285.html
> Many projects, groups, and businesses have registered their own domain
> name. Your domain name is a natural choice to use as the base for your
> universal identifier... when, of course, the the domain is relevant to
> the resource you are naming.
Domain names are great for dividing up the universal namespace nowadays.
Languages like Java and XML use domain names for this purpose, and it's
not a bad choice for Scheme, either.
> HTTP URL's
>
> Many people and projects, even if they don't have their own domain
> name, do have their own home page on the web.
>
> http://swissnet.ai.mit.edu/~jaffer/SLIB.html
> http://www.gnu.org/software/kawa/
> ...
>
> This SRFI supports using HTTP URL's as the base of a universal
> identifier when that is convenient.
If "http"-scheme URLs were used for identifying libraries, I'd think
that each URL would actually be a reference to a Web object that could
by retrieved via HTTP to define the referenced library. If we only
wanted a name for a library, I'd suggest not using URLs. Is that what
you had in mind?
--
http://www.neilvandyke.org/