- From: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
- Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 15:25:46 +0200
- To: "ext Phil Dawes" <pdawes@users.sourceforge.net>
- Cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
On Monday, Nov 24, 2003, at 01:55 Europe/Helsinki, ext Phil Dawes wrote: > Hi Patrick, > > Patrick Stickler writes: >> >> On Saturday, Nov 22, 2003, at 01:21 Europe/Helsinki, ext Phil Dawes >> wrote: >> [...] >> >>> If this is the case, why bother with the MGET stuff at all? It seems >>> like a lot of hassle for something you can't even rely on. >> >> Because, in order to bootstrap the SW, there must be a standardized >> protocol by which, having only a URI, one can obtain an authoritative >> description of the resource denoted by that URI. >> > > Why authoritative? > Uh. Er. Because of trust, of course. > Wouldn't a bunch of non-authoritative term brokers built up by social > concensus do the same job, but without the problems that have > generated so much noise on this list. Hardly. > > It appears to me that decoupling the terms themselves from the > mechanisms of looking up their descriptions and meanings is of > paramount importance to creating a scalable, resilient SW. Eh? And how pray tell is that actually supposed to work, much less provide a scalable resilient SW? Decouple the terms from their meaning or how one gets at their meaning? Think about what you're suggesting... Patrick > > Cheers, > > Phil > >
Received on Monday, 24 November 2003 12:21:34 UTC