• To: "'John Cowan'" <jcowan@r...>
• Subject: RE: Reality check needed ....
• From: "Michael Kay" <michael.h.kay@n...>
• Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2002 15:34:23 +0100
• Cc: <bill.dehora@p...>,"'Jeff Lowery'" <jlowery@s...>,"'Mike Champion'" <mc@x...>,<xml-dev@l...>
• Importance: Normal
• In-reply-to: <200208071229.IAA27305@m...>
• Reply-to: <michael.h.kay@n...>

> On that view, all objects should be given completely 
> arbitrary names (OIDs, e.g.) with no connection to human 
> understanding at all, and defenders of this position are not 
> lacking.  Me, I think it's just quirky that the 3rd St. Music 
> School (in New York) is on 13th St.

And for that matter, it's quirky that a name beginning with "http" might
refer to an object that isn't accessible using HTTP.

I don't object to people being allowed to allocate names that mean
something to them (like "Michael"). I do object to rules that force you
to pack information into the components of a name: i.e. that blur the
distinction between a name and a descriptor.

Michael Kay
Software AG
home: Michael.H.Kay@n...
work: Michael.Kay@s... 

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Reality check needed ....
    • From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>

• References:
  • Re: Reality check needed ....
    • From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Reality check needed ....
• Next by Date: Re: Reality check needed ....
• Previous by thread: Re: Reality check needed ....
• Next by thread: Re: Reality check needed ....
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread