On Thu, 2002-01-24 at 08:52, Patrick Stickler wrote: > On 2002-01-24 2:47, "ext jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com" > <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com> wrote: > > > > >> Here are the options I find acceptable: > >> > >> (a) Shoot reification on the grounds that > >> there isn't consensus about what it means > >> nor how to use it. > > I don't see how we can do this, as reification is at present > the most straightforward way to qualify statements. ?!?!? This must be some use of the word "straightforward" with which I am not familiar. All the feedback I hear about reification is "run away! run away!" I'm interested to hear about deployment of refication used in this manner, and some user community that found it to be straightforward. [...] -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/Received on Thursday, 24 January 2002 19:04:03 EST
This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:43:59 EDT