OT: Arguments (was: a number of other threads)
> -----Original Message----- > From: Alaric Snell [mailto:alaric@a...] > Sent: 12 February 2002 17:57 > To: Paul Prescod > Cc: xml-dev@l... > Subject: Re: Re: Why REST? (RE: WSIO- With Name) [...] > > > What is the URI of me? http://www.alaric-snell.com/ is the URI of an HTML > > > page about me, not *me*. > > > > It is if you say it is and the rest of us agree. > > But it cannot capture *me*. What operations can be performed upon Alaric > Snell? GET does not apply to me. I am not representable as a string of bits. > I do not have a MIME type. [...] <tongue-in-cheek action="firmly"> Anyone noticed that threads on certain topics always hit the same arguments after a certain number of postings? There's probably some kind of universal constant involved. With URIs, it's 'aha, but what does a URI _really_ mean?' We should develop shorthands for these and save ourselves some time: > Are you aware of URI-Metaphysics-Argument #12? >> Yes, but I parry your argument, with "The Matrix Riposte": I'm a real >> person and not some ghost in the machine We could then develop some Best Practices for URI Arguments. "To promote interoperability among mailing list arguments, one must play the Matrix Riposte within 10 messages of the keyword URI being mentioned". Over time once used enough and as new technologies emerge, arguments tend to evolve. We could call this the Pokemon Principle. It keeps the game interesting. Any takers? </tongue-in-cheek> Cheers, L.
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!
Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!
Download The World's Best XML IDE!
Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!
Subscribe in XML format