W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-uri@w3.org > June 2000

Re: Can everyone be happy?

From: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 23:41:55 -0400
Message-ID: <033a01bfdcc4$fa52bbd0$a60a1712@col.w3.org>
To: "Sam Hunting" <sam_hunting@yahoo.com>, "David Carlisle" <david@dcarlisle.demon.co.uk>, <abrahams@acm.org>
Cc: <xml-uri@w3.org>

-----Original Message-----
From: Sam Hunting <sam_hunting@yahoo.com>
To: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>; David Carlisle
<david@dcarlisle.demon.co.uk>; abrahams@acm.org <abrahams@acm.org>
Cc: xml-uri@w3.org <xml-uri@w3.org>
Date: Thursday, June 22, 2000 1:19 PM
Subject: Re: Can everyone be happy?

>--- Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org> wrote:
>> <flame condescension="on" spellchecker="0" frustration="98%"  >
>This <flame> tag doesn't have a namespace prefix, so how do I know what
>its semantics are? ;-)

I forgot to say they are -- ignore the following, it was written while
tired, feverish
under an allergic reaction to antibiotics taken for another fever.
There is no semantics to be associated with the content of the <flame>
in the default namespace in that document and recommedned processing is
This can of course be established by context and agreement between the
without a namespace idnetifier. ;-)

><? "To imagine a language is to imagine a form of life."
>    -- Ludwig Wittgenstein, Philosophical Investigations ?>
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Send instant messages with Yahoo! Messenger.
Received on Thursday, 22 June 2000 23:40:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:32:44 UTC