W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org > June 2014

Re: License unknown

From: Joachim Baran <joachim.baran@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2014 22:00:38 -0700
Message-ID: <CAObSwHV-LC3aK0-Qy7u30ggSNwpfmugwAPJRJgjrKnHqapYdjg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
Cc: Oliver Ruebenacker <curoli@gmail.com>, "M. Scott Marshall" <mscottmarshall@gmail.com>, "Eric Prud'hommeaux" <eric@w3.org>, "Gray, Alasdair J G" <A.J.G.Gray@hw.ac.uk>, Jerven Bolleman <me@jerven.eu>, HCLS IG <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>
On 22 June 2014 19:30, Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com> wrote:

> What do you have against booleans? :)
  My points were:

   With a boolean solution -- especially when it only denotes whether
license lookup was tried -- it is not clear what information that bears.
Why would this boolean ever be set to false? Regardless of it's state, what
does it imply? It provides no further information than omitting the
explicit licensing statement (Jerven's solution) and it does not provide
extra labeling (Michel's solution).

> That seems like a sort of "too many notes" comment about Mozart's work, if
> you can reach far enough to follow the analogy.
  I actually could not reach far enough to follow the analogy. I am also
not sure whether analogies, metaphors or allegories are adequate to discuss
this matter -- or any other professional topic.

Received on Monday, 23 June 2014 05:01:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:53:09 UTC