304715 - install.rdf should not use urn:mozilla:install-manifest as the subject of every extension description

Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX

(SeaMonkey :: Installer, defect)

Description

[Ron Alford]

User-Agent:       Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.7.10) Gecko/20050716 Firefox/1.0.6
Build Identifier: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.7.10) Gecko/20050716 Firefox/1.0.6

According to http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/Install_Manifests#Layout
the subject for each install manifest is urn:mozilla:install-manifest.

This prevents applications from gathering basic module information using
standard RDF techniques.  The RDF merge of two install manifests will not have
two seperate descriptions, but one merged description.

It would be better to have uri for each extension to be unique, and have it
marked by rdf:type.  A good uri would also obviate the need for em:id.

So instead of
<rdf:Desription rdf:about="urn:...">
  <em:id>{...}</em:id>
...

It would just be
<em:Manifest rdf:about="http://www.example.org/myextension#Manifest">
...

The uri that an extension uses doesn't need to be useful, just unique and
constant.  It could even be urn:mozilla-install:[e-mail]
following the em:id convention for firefox 1.5



Reproducible: Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Load one install.rdf into an RDF model.
2. Load another one in.
3. See the horror.

Actual Results:  
A merged description with a jumble of properties off of it.

Expected Results:  
Two seperate descriptions that can be queried.

Comment 1

[Benjamin Smedberg]

If we don't use a well-known starting point, how would the EM be able to read
the manifest? This is WONTFIX because of longstanding practice.

Comment 2

[Ron Alford]

It's easy to find it: Search for the type.