Lists Home |
Date Index |
firstname.lastname@example.org (Bill de hÓra) writes:
>Go figure. You know, this semantic web stuff matters. It's important
>to push our boundaries and apply some imagination to our problems.
You've done a nice job of removing boundaries. I feel like you've taken
W3C geometry and pulled out an unnecessary axiom, letting the supposedly
uncrossing lines of URI-to-resource relationships cross.
I suspect that in practice most people will continue to treat those
relationships as if they don't cross, but dropping that piece opens some
new and useful fields where imagination can flourish.
You've put up a nice view of some of those fields at:
I'm especially interested in how some of the issues you describe there
for URIs appear applicable to more general XML processing:
>Defensive coding is removed purely by relaxing the tolerances being
>engineered to, because the intent of the system is that there might
>be more than one.
Great stuff here.
Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets
Errors, errors, all fall down!
http://simonstl.com -- http://monasticxml.org