• To: 'John Cowan' <jcowan@r...>
• Subject: RE: Comparable considered necessary
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 08:56:44 -0500
• Cc: prb@f..., xml-dev@l...

There is a name of a cat to ask inside.  The name is 
meaningless but it is used by lots of servers and that 
makes it moreorless a reliable way to get the cat's 
attention.

len

-----Original Message-----
From: John Cowan [mailto:jcowan@r...]

"Bullard, Claude L (Len)" scripsit:

> Umm... that is how things work now.  It only falls over 
> when the [namespace] name as unique name is considered to have a 
> semantic value of its own right, when in fact, it is a 
> meaningless string assigned a value in the context of 
> the process using it.

It's *almost* meaningless, Len: there's a source-of-authority inside.

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Comparable considered necessary
    • From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Comparable considered necessary
• 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