- From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2013 16:15:06 -0500
- To: public-lod@w3.org
- Message-ID: <528FC95A.1010403@openlinksw.com>
On 11/22/13 3:10 PM, mike amundsen wrote: > sigh... copying to the list this time. > > On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 1:10 PM, mike amundsen <mamund@yahoo.com > <mailto:mamund@yahoo.com>> wrote: > > yep. In past writing/speaking I've drawn a line from James Gibson > through Donald Norman and up to Roy Fielding[1] > > > [1] http://amundsen.com/blog/archives/1109 > Are words such as "enables" , "facilitates" etc.. so bad that we can no longer make statements like: <a/> enables name to address indirection in HTML via URIs? Basically, that it enables exploitation URI serve dually as a document name and a content access address i.e., a hyperlink. Would REST be less useful if the word "affordance" wasn't engrained in its narrative? [1] http://bit.ly/15tk1Au -- hash based URIs that denote things unambiguously while also making full use of HTTP URI duality [2] http://bit.ly/17RQQXX -- name resolution, data source names, and networks. -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen Founder & CEO OpenLink Software Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter Profile: https://twitter.com/kidehen Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/+KingsleyIdehen/about LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen
Attachments
- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Received on Friday, 22 November 2013 21:15:28 UTC