• To: "'Dare Obasanjo'" <dareo@m...>, "'Manos Batsis'" <m.batsis@b...>
• Subject: RE: Comparable considered necessary
• From: Bill de hÓra <bill.dehora@p...>
• Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 17:39:33 +0100
• Cc: <xml-dev@l...>
• Importance: Normal
• In-reply-to: <8BD7226E07DDFF49AF5EF4030ACE0B7E06621F10@r...>
• Organization: Propylon
• Reply-to: <bill.dehora@p...>

>>
From: Dare Obasanjo [mailto:dareo@m...] 

The example was purposely simplistic to illustrate a point. You and
Manos have failed to see the point which indicates that it is probably
more subtle than I thought. It isn't worth going into a lengthy
exposition about though so I'll just leave it at "An identifier is not a
location". 

Feel free to disagree. 
>>

ROTFL... You shouldn't confuse prescription with fact or subtleness with
a lack of clarity. What you're claiming is neither correct nor subtle;
on the web http: URLs have location, modulo non-registered domains. So
there's really no need to disagree. 

regards,
Bill de hÓra

..
Propylon
www.propylon.com 

 

• References:
  • RE: Comparable considered necessary
    • From: "Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@m...>

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