W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-sw-meaning@w3.org > March 2004

Re: Self-descriptive assertions

From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 20:56:19 -0500
To: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@isr.umd.edu>
Cc: public-sw-meaning@w3.org
Message-ID: <20040331015619.GP11976@markbaker.ca>

On Tue, Mar 30, 2004 at 09:03:30AM -0500, Bijan Parsia wrote:
> Really? Wow. *every* time? *Any* constraint?

Yes.  Any time a constraint is relaxed, properties are lost or reduced.
That's what I mean by "harm".

> No matter what the reason?

No, of course not.  If the reason you relaxed a constraint was that
there was a tradeoff worth making, then that's ok.  There's still
"harm" done, but (presumably) less than the alternative.

> In any case, I deny that the constraint ever existed. I think the 
> "constraints" you see are in fact emergent properties of the system, 
> rather than imposed restrictions.

Yes, that's exactly my point, and what I'm telling you is that I have
*observed* the self-description constraint, at least with respect to
the media type, by studying the software on the Web.

FWIW, here's one example of that observation that's relevant to this
discussion of media types;

http://www.markbaker.ca/2004/01/XmlDispatchTest/

> We are talking trade-offs, yes? So we always, well, trade *something* 
> off.

Yes.  Properties are traded-off.

Mark.
-- 
Mark Baker.   Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.        http://www.markbaker.ca
Received on Tuesday, 30 March 2004 20:49:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:42:16 GMT