[uf-discuss] Re: Software Projects Description

Scott Reynen scott at randomchaos.com
Mon Oct 9 19:26:44 PDT 2006

On Oct 9, 2006, at 8:19 PM, Lachlan Hunt wrote:

>> - How many common public softwares (downloadable from a Web page)  
>> do MD5 or SHA?
> * Apache (PGP, MD5)
> * PHP (MD5)
> * Mozilla (PGP, MD5, SHA - from the FTP server only)
> * Most Linux distros
> I know, that's all softare for geeks, but I'd expect more sites to  
> consider providing them if they were easier for a user to use, or  
> in fact handled automatically.

Be that as it may, the microformats process requires an abundance of  
currently published content.  Checksums face a common chicken-egg  
problem.  Better software would encourage publishers to use  
checksums; more published checksums would encourages software  
developers to make better software.  But where do we start - with  
publishers or software developers?  Microformats are based on the  
idea that it's better for publishers to lead and software developers  
to follow because there are many more publishers than software  
developers.  If your hope for the future of checksums is based on the  
assumption that software developers should take the lead,  
microformats are probably not the best way to make that happen.


More information about the microformats-discuss mailing list