Re: universal languages

• From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
• Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2001 14:14:49 -0500
• To: danbri@w3.org
• Cc: timbl@w3.org, horrocks@cs.man.ac.uk, www-rdf-logic@w3.org
• Message-Id: <20010201141449M.pfps@research.bell-labs.com>

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
Subject: Re: universal languages
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 13:58:43 -0500 (EST)

> 
> One might also point out that XML can "represent anything"... as can
> Unicode...
> 
> dan


I most strongly disagree with the first part of this statement!  (I also
disagree with the second part, but less strongly.)


As a test, how can XML ``represent'' the state of affairs that might be
(partly) rendered in English as

	Dan Brinkley believes that XML can represent anything, but Peter
	Patel-Schneider doesn't (yet) agree with him.

Another, more prosaic, test of XML's adequacy would be a representation of 

	Either it is snowing or tomorrow will be Tuesday.


peter

Received on Thursday, 1 February 2001 14:16:09 UTC