[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

OT: Arguments (was: a number of other threads)

• To: "Alaric Snell" <alaric@a...>,<xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: OT: Arguments (was: a number of other threads)
• From: "Leigh Dodds" <ldodds@i...>
• Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 12:19:20 -0000
• Importance: Normal
• In-reply-to: <E16ahCF-0001kh-00@c...>

> -----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.

• Follow-Ups:
  • OT: Re: OT: Arguments (was: a number of other threads)
    • From: "Rick Jelliffe" <ricko@a...>
  • Re: OT: Arguments (was: a number of other threads)
    • From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>
  • Re: OT: Arguments (was: a number of other threads)
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
  • Re: OT: Arguments (was: a number of other threads)
    • From: Alaric Snell <alaric@a...>

• References:
  • Re: Re: Why REST? (RE: WSIO- With Name)
    • From: Alaric Snell <alaric@a...>

• Prev by Date: Architectural Forms, A Summary
• Next by Date: Names and locations (WAS: Why REST?)
• Previous by thread: Re: Re: Why REST? (RE: WSIO- With Name)
• Next by thread: Re: OT: Arguments (was: a number of other threads)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread