[gmpi] Re: low level API - Abstract Factory summary

  • From: Jeff McClintock <jeffmcc@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: gmpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2005 07:28:08 +1300

Hi Jack,

COM GUIDs have been in wide use for years, they don't collide either. Why are we trying to solve a non-problem?

Jack O'Quin wrote:
Mike Berry <mberry@xxxxxxxxx> writes:


        And what happens when a noobie decides that http://delay is a
        good url to identify their plugin? Is there a GMPI
        registration service? GUIDs can avoid this problem. And we can
        put safeguards in the API to catch where people have not
        changed the GUID in a sample project.


Good question.  That's like asking what if he uses 0xdeadbeef as a
UUID (or 0x0123456789abcdef0123456789abcdef)?

This is just the point.  With URI's, each party is protected from
collisions with idiotic names because they use names over which they
have control.  So, you could use...

  gmpid://plugins.adobe.com/guid/mike_berry_delay

This would never collide with a URI from any other source.  If you
want, you could even ensure that counterfeits are detectable via the
web.  One way would be to maintain an equivalent `http:' URI that
returns the MD5 checksum of your real plugin.

Do UUID's provide a similar authentication mechanism?  I guess you
could post your own on the web, but how would users know where to look
for them?


----------------------------------------------------------------------
Generalized Music Plugin Interface (GMPI) public discussion list
Participation in this list is contingent upon your abiding by the
following rules:  Please stay on topic.  You are responsible for your own
words.  Please respect your fellow subscribers.  Please do not
redistribute anyone else's words without their permission.

Archive: //www.freelists.org/archives/gmpi
Email gmpi-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx w/ subject "unsubscribe" to unsubscribe

Other related posts: