- 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
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 UTC