> Looked at in a certain way, this is a very, very good thing. If A > moves to schema aa and expects to be able to converse with B > using schema a, Don't forget that the SW aim is that eventually both A and B can convert their systems from using "a" schema to "aa" schema automtically by semantic botostrapping. O.K.... let's say A uses "a", and B uses "a". Now, C comes along with "aa". A tries to read something of C's (written in aa), but can't. Luckily either the aa schema has assertions about how it relates to "a", allowing A and B to upgrade, or these assertions are found in a third party index (ahem...SWAG...ahem). Versioning is good... but I thought that part of the SW was how to get around versioning? -- Kindest Regards, Sean B. Palmer @prefix : <http://webns.net/roughterms/> . [ :name "Sean B. Palmer" ] :hasHomepage <http://infomesh.net/sbp/> .Received on Thursday, 22 February 2001 10:29:12 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:48 GMT