Rename `WEB` to aid in clarity? about osv-schema HOT 3 CLOSED

I believe our rationale for going with "WEB" is that it implies a generic web link, rather than some completely unspecified URL (which may not even point to a web page, e.g. "mailto:", "ftp://").

And similar to #66, renaming fields comes with a cost -- and it's not clear to me there's a strong benefit here in renaming this.

from osv-schema.

I believe our rationale for going with "WEB" is that it implies a generic web link, rather than some completely unspecified URL (which may not even point to a web page, e.g. "mailto:", "ftp://").

Gotcha, thanks for the clarification!

And similar to #66, renaming fields comes with a cost -- and it's not clear to me there's a strong benefit here in renaming this.

Agreed, and in retrospect there's better ways to solve this problem (e.g. tagging as opposed to categories). Closing.

from osv-schema.

One comment: realistically FTP is dead, most browsers no longer support it natively (e.g. chrome), and there are 3,290 ftp links across the GSD dataset in total. There are NO ftp links for 2021/2022 and a total of 200-250 for the last decade. There are 0 mailto: links, and 0 types of other links. So essentially in the last two years all the data is http/https anyways.

from osv-schema.