Lists Home |
Date Index |
- From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <email@example.com>
- To: "Simon St.Laurent" <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com
- Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 14:14:33 -0500
The answer is in response to slamming both
groves and arch forms without taking time to
understand either. In that case, the needs
don't matter; the source matters. NIH.
So far Borden is doing the best job of
stating the needs and he is willing to
entertain any working solution. He also
wants a shorter development cycle I think.
Groves are one possible way to meet the
stated needs. What are the others? Do
they have tools? Are they working solutions
for other applications? Toyz is Toyz but
the infoSet is real and there today. Groves
are real and there today. Apply the
Berners Lee test (paraphrased): if two groups that never
met had the same problem, would they come
up with roughly the same solution?
Intergraph Public Safety
Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h
From: Simon St.Laurent [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Wednesday, August 02, 2000 12:32 PM
Subject: RE: Why the Infoset?
At 01:15 PM 8/2/00 -0500, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
>And now possibly the InfoSet.
>NIH: Weird how that works.
I don't think it's just a case of NIH.
I think we're talking about real cases of conflicting needs.
There have been plenty of legitimate reasons voiced for all perspectives on
this issue, and I don't think it's merely a case of not wanting to play
with other people's toys.