Re: Terminology: `absolutization' is vile

> Re: Terminology: `absolutization' is vile
> 
> From: Sam Hunting (sam_hunting@yahoo.com)
> Date: Thu, May 18 2000
> 
> *Next message: David Hunter: "URLs for Namespaces: I don't buy it"
> 
>    * Previous message: David Carlisle: "Re: Toward the self-describing web [was: Irony heaped on irony]"
>    * Maybe in reply to: Paul W. Abrahams: "Terminology: `absolutization' is vile"
>    * Next in thread: John Cowan: "Re: Terminology: `absolutization' is vile"
>    * Next in thread: David Carlisle: "Re: Use cases"
>    * Next in thread: Michael Rys: "RE: Use cases"
>    * Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
>    * Other mail archives: [this mailing list] [other W3C mailing lists]
>    * Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]
> 
>   ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Message-ID: <20000518170829.10427.qmail@web3004.mail.yahoo.com>
> Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 10:08:29 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Sam Hunting <sam_hunting@yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: Terminology: `absolutization' is vile

"Fully resolved" is good. "Complete" would be good too. 
"Absolutization" is ugly.

Rick Jelliffe