[uf-discuss] Re: Software Projects Description

Colin Barrett timber at lava.net
Mon Oct 9 17:19:54 PDT 2006

On Oct 9, 2006, at 2:02 PM, Karl Dubost wrote:

> - How many common public softwares (downloadable from a Web page) do  
> MD5 or SHA?

I can go dig up some URLs and post them on the wiki, if need be  
(although I think some of the obvious ones like SourceForge are  
already on there and do provide checksums).

> - The average user will never do MD5
> 	not, because it is too much effort
> 	but he or she is not a geek.

All the more reason why it should be easier for browser manufacturers  
(or 3rd party developers) to build this sort of thing right in to the  
browser. I'm not seeing how's it could possibly be a Bad Thing for an  
optional checksum to be included.

> - MD5 or SHA are useful only for a small geek community where the  
> software is released on a distributed network (Linux, open source  
> projects, etc.)

I disagree. Having the MD5 or SHA checksum prevents the problem of  
downloading a file and then having it either corrupted, and/or not  
completely downloaded.

> PS: geek is not used qs a dismissive term.

I should hope not, considering this is a highly technical mailing  
list ;)


More information about the microformats-discuss mailing list