On Sat, Aug 17, 2013 at 11:42 AM, Heydon Pickering <heydon@heydonworks.com> wrote: >>They don't need to. Semantics on that level of detail don't matter. If > semantics of that level of detail fall in the forest, no one is there > to hear it. > > Perhaps you could explain, in this case, why so many discussions have taken > place on the subject for such a long time Because the thinking of the semantics for the sake of semantics (as in more semantics the better, since semantics are good) as opposed to thinking of semantics as a way of getting someone else's receiving software to exhibit some commonly useful behavior is a common trap for people to fall into. -- Henri Sivonen hsivonen@hsivonen.fi http://hsivonen.iki.fi/Received on Monday, 19 August 2013 07:20:02 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:16:34 UTC