Conversation
|
This looks very reasonable. To answer some of the Qs:
I think it makes sense. Resource being an article, video or podcast. Package encapsulates installable utilities, plug-ins etc. It doesn't capture other broader ecosystem support though ie. Preview.js or similar tooling that isn't really a package. It's rare so perhaps not important enough to separate?
I think separating the makes sense because the taxonomy is distinctly different between Resource and Package. While there are some overlaps I don't think that's a reason to conflate them. The rest looks great, perhaps we should update with the latest list from the website and push this into production. |
First, cleaning up types before porting data over. This aims to make types (and lists of
typevalues) easy to consume e.g. in solid-site.Resourcevs.Package(Ecosystemfor the union). Are we happy with this terminology? (It matches solid-site's current notation.)"library"option for Packages. We discussed this a long time ago; I don't think there's a useful distinction between"package"and"library". (I could still see calling the merged type"software"...)ResourceCategoriesintoCategories.CategoriesintoPackageCategoriesandResourceCategories? It looks likeEducationalis the one and only one used by resources. It's also used in one package, so I guess it could be listed twice...yarn build:schemageneratesschema.json.Second, restructure to use individual JSON files in
data.distis no longer in the repo but is still in the JSON export. Many more scripts.