W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > August 2000

SV: SV: Instant RDF - Panopolies

From: Greg FitzPatrick <greg.fitzpatrick@metamatrix.se>
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 17:26:35 +0200
To: "Seth Russell" <seth@robustai.net>, "rdf" <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Message-ID: <NEBBJEFAGLBLMABGAJBJOENNCDAA.greg.fitzpatrick@metamatrix.se>


Greg FitzPatrick wrote:

>> Machines may have no problem reading things that humans have trouble with
>> but they don't decide what protocols to use, humans do - at least for
now:-)

Seth Russell answered:

>This is true only sans effective tools.  Cases in point:  Lotus 1.2.3,
MSWord, postscript, and PDF.

 Seth,
 You listed "products" developed by (or into) monopolies or at least
oligarchies.  We (who are we?) are a panopoly, a common interest affinity
group.

I am sure that the technologies you named had to package themselves and
struggle within their fostering environments in order to reach product
status...

Come to think of it I am not sure about that at all.  Perhaps they were just
brilliant ideas, that due to exceedingly effective RAD-teams, avoided
death-by-committee and ended up as extremely successful products.  Anyhow
they got by in the internal marketplace of their companies.

Be that as it may, they are proprietary products containing (somewhat)
proprietary technologies and panopolies are not supposed to create
proprietary products or technologies.

Back to square one.  We still have to "sell" the technology - if only within
the panopoly.  Survival-by-committee.

Greg








































































Seth Russell
http://RobustAI.net/MyNetwork/index.html
http://robustAI.net/MyNetwork/StickeyCyberMolecules.html
Http://RobustAi.net/Ai/Conjecture.htm
Received on Monday, 28 August 2000 11:35:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:44 GMT