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

RE: Comparable considered necessary

• To: "xml-Dev (E-mail)" <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: Comparable considered necessary
• From: "Paul Brown" <prb@f...>
• Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 08:58:24 -0400
• Cc: "John Cowan" <jcowan@r...>
• Thread-index: AcJB/sjoluU2eGODTqOycanDHvSpUgAAINJg
• Thread-topic: Comparable considered necessary

> -----Original Message-----
> [John Cowan [mailto:jcowan 't reutershealth.com] ]
> Well, really this is not so mysteriously platonic.  After all, when
> we want to refer to Boston, we don't insert Boston (the city) into a
> sentence: we use its name, e.g. in this sentence.  And when we
> want to refer to the *word* for Boston, we don't insert the very
> word into a sentence: we use *its* name, 'Boston', e.g. in 
> *this* sentence.

But is "Boston" referring to the municipal government, the city and surrounding suburbs, the basketball team, or the rock band of yore?  Refining the reference requires context and intepretation.  A URI needs to stand on its own.

	-- Paul

• Prev by Date: Re: XHTML 2.0 and the death of XLink and XPointer?
• Next by Date: Re: XLink olden days
• Previous by thread: RE: Comparable considered necessary
• Next by thread: RE: Comparable considered necessary
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread