[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
On Tue, 2002-01-22 at 12:57, Clark C . Evans wrote:
> Am I just really ignorant.... or is it common sport on this
> list to patronize questions which don't use words "perfectly"
> as God has intended? It seems to me that words can have
> different meanings based upon context, and that if a word
> does not mesh with the meaning that of a word that you have
> in your head at this particular time... perhaps your context
> is different from the authors? Or mabye perhaps you have
> not clearly read what they wrote? Or perhaps this behavior is
> an just a ritual that distinguishes the regular XML-DEV
> people from transient posters (a rite of passage)? In any
> case and for some strange reason I find this aspect of XML-DEV
> particulary irritating this early afternoon. Perhaps it is
> beacuse I've been away from regular XML-DEV participation
> in the last year or so...
God aside, I think it's the nature of the subjects being discussed this
particular week. URIs and semantics are both contentious zones, where
using words in particular ways can madden people quickly.
If you want real fun, try re-reading the xml-uri@w3.org archives,
uri@w3.org, or urn-ietf@netsol.com archives.
My answer to the whole mess is simple: there ain't any meaning, just
labels and structures. Anything else is a bonus or a nightmare,
depending.
--
Simon St.Laurent
Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets
Errors, errors, all fall down!
http://simonstl.com
|
