> Since any existing client already uses the cddb format, I completely
> agree that we have no need to release cddb submission client code.
If a good new standard emerges, I would suggest that all client authors
*remove* CDDB submission code from their applications. I was about to add
CDDB submission capability to my applications, but I won't be doing that
now given Escient's stand that they "own" submitted entries
> I was wondering about client storage. It will probably end up as a cache
> server, storing the n recently retrieved entries (with n retricted by
> the user)
We aren't talking about a lot of data here, and it's data that we know
will be re-used, so I don't see any compelling reason to adopt a cache
model
> I also think we should take our time, write down some specs is an
> organized way and let the effort roll-out naturally.
I agree. And the first priority is getting a nice, simple, and possibly
extendable format/protocol. All this talk about lyrics and inter-server
communication is doing my head in... :-)
Mike