[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Err.. right. I fail to see the distinction. I have
to get the cat's attention one way or another or
accept the name on face value. It comes down
to the will to dererference, did the cat leave
Thing One or Thing Two to explain things, and
do I accept the interchangeability of Thing One
and Thing Two as authorized representatives.
The name inside the name documents the authority.
I have to accept it as being asserted. I don't
have to accept what it asserts. The URI agreement
is the systemic agreement of the former. The latter
is accepted or negotiated.
len
-----Original Message-----
From: John Cowan [mailto:jcowan@reutershealth.com]
"Bullard, Claude L (Len)" scripsit:
> There is a name of a cat to ask inside. The name is
> meaningless but it is used by lots of servers and that
> makes it moreorless a reliable way to get the cat's
> attention.
No, no. Inside a *namespace* name is a name of the source of authority
for that name.
|
