[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Tumbleweeds
I'm changing the subject line to keep this from becoming topical dark matter. The problem of using an old one is it comes with it's community's semiotic baggage as in repurposing "namespace". It is one of the trickier bits of communication in practice. As Dr. Goldfarb said about writing specifications or standards, "conserve nouns". I understood Peter because of using the term for a similar problem only to be told the term was "clica". A very long time ago when sociology was trendy, we would talk about clique theory, how one could identify subcultures by their argot or lingo and how the right to create and promote insider words was a sign of status as well as a means to establish dominance by marking conversational territory. See "[expletive deleted] on trees". It is also a means to avoid the same. len -----Original Message----- From: Mike Sokolov [mailto:sokolov@ifactory.com] Sent: Friday, July 06, 2012 8:31 AM To: Len Bullard Cc: David Lee; Michael Kay; xml-dev@lists.xml.org Subject: Re: "Introducing MicroXML, Part 1: Explore the basic principles of ... > The king has clothes. You are not his subject. > > len > > unless you want to be personally I'm happy to be a king's follower in this instance. I don't mind coinage of new terms as needed, but to avoid jargon it's preferable to repurpose an old one that's relevant. How about "links" or "references"? But I don't have any real stake in changing the terms of that discourse: just saying. sokolov
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] |
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|