- From: Gillman, Daniel - BLS <Gillman.Daniel@bls.gov>
- Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2012 15:57:00 -0500
- To: "washingtona@acm.org" <washingtona@acm.org>, "Ronald P. Reck" <rreck@rrecktek.com>
- CC: "public-gld-wg@w3.org" <public-gld-wg@w3.org>
Anne, Thanks. I am not sure persistence requires predictability. We just need to know that data can be accessed. Though, I am willing to be persuaded otherwise. :-) Dan Dan Gillman Bureau of Labor Statistics Office of Survey Methods Research 2 Massachusetts Ave, NE Washington, DC 20212 USA Tel +1.202.691.7523 FAX +1.202.691.7426 Email Gillman.Daniel@BLS.Gov ----------------------------------------- "Whatever it is, I'm against it! No matter what it is or who commenced it, I'm against it!" ~ Groucho Marx ------------------------------------------ -----Original Message----- From: Anne Washington (GWMAIL) [mailto:annew@gwmail.gwu.edu] On Behalf Of Anne L. Washington, PhD Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2012 3:06 PM To: Ronald P. Reck Cc: public-gld-wg@w3.org Subject: Re: a "long period" for Stability +1 Dan, That would work! How about this: Persistence = predictable machine access unbounded by time. It is however, a tall order. But from a standards and conceptual point of view it works to avoid any specific period of time. Thanks for asking the question Ron and thanks for the input Dan! Anne L. Washington, PhD Academic Work: George Mason University Standards Work: W3C GLD working group http://washington.gmu.edu/ On Thu, 9 Feb 2012, Ronald P. Reck wrote: > When it is logical through the addition of the word "unbounded" to > "tighten up the definition", it sounds like the correct answer to me. > > > +1 > > > On 02/09/2012 02:26 PM, Gillman, Daniel - BLS wrote: >> How about this? >> Persistent data - data for which machine access is unbounded >> >> Dan >> >> >> Dan Gillman >> Bureau of Labor Statistics >> Office of Survey Methods Research >> 2 Massachusetts Ave, NE >> Washington, DC 20212 USA >> Tel +1.202.691.7523 >> FAX +1.202.691.7426 >> Email Gillman.Daniel@BLS.Gov >> ----------------------------------------- >> "Whatever it is, I'm against it! >> No matter what it is or who commenced it, I'm against it!" >> ~ Groucho Marx >> ------------------------------------------ >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Ronald P. Reck [mailto:rreck@rrecktek.com] >> Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2012 2:16 PM >> To: public-gld-wg@w3.org >> Subject: a "long period" for Stability >> >> As Anne W. pointed out to me in private communications, a common >> definition of persistent sounds like this: >> >> >> Persistent = Information is machine accessible for long periods of time. >> >> >> The problem I have with this is that "long periods" is a very >> ambiguous concept on the web. I know we touched on this at the F2F >> but I wish I knew how to tighten it up a bit. >> >> - long periods to data at my house is through 2 hard drive standards >> (MFM/IDE/EIDE/SATA..) >> - Long periods in the scope of the Internet is a couple decades...? >> - Long periods to a person might mean a generation... >> - Long periods of weather data could mean since the last ice age? >> >> Any formative comments about how I can rephrase "long periods" to >> scope it better would be appreciated. >> >> -Ronald P. Reck >> > >
Received on Thursday, 9 February 2012 20:57:28 UTC