Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
That's why communications which require discipline to be reliable cite authorities (what governs or dominates the communication by consent). Very simple, really, until one gets down to the politics of that, and then one discovers ruthless force. Computers don't care about authorities or semantics. Ummm.... the scene in The Holy Grail where Michael Palin manages to [expletive deleted] off King Arthur with the discussion of collectives. len -----Original Message----- From: Miles Sabin [mailto:msabin@i...] Who cares what the owner means. There's nothing to stop anyone else using that very same URI to mean something else. That's why URIs can't on their own convey meaning. To get that you need semantic agreement between the producers and the consumers of the URIs. Note what's doing the work here: the agreement, not any form of administrative control over any resource on the end of the URI. If enough people choose to interpret, http://www.markbaker.ca/2002/01/Bricks/ as "denoting the class of people who don't have a firm grip on the concept of naming", then that's what it means (for them) no matter what Mark might think. That's not in and of itself a problem, but it could be, eg. if Mark wanted to start talking to one of that group about bricks.
|
