- From: Damian Steer <damian.steer@hp.com>
- Date: Sun, 09 Oct 2005 21:30:31 +0100
- To: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
- CC: semantic-web@w3.org
Charles McCathieNevile wrote: > > On Sat, 08 Oct 2005 15:20:52 +0200, Jacek Kopecky > <jacek.kopecky@deri.org> wrote: > >> So I cannot choose to use http://w3.org/ to mean my car, and I don't >> think anything on the web gives anybody the opposite idea. > > Nonsense. Of course you can. There is a social convention that you > don't, and nothing more. I think the term 'social convention' is a bit weak, although I agree 'cannot' is too strong. Social convention suggests things like passing the port the correct way round the table, or wearing clothes to church. If you're immune to social pressures such things are meaningless (although the vicar may call the police). However using http://w3.org/ feels reckless since it's out of your hands. One day you're happily using http://w3.org/car, the next you find w3c have a 'CSS and RDF' working group, and most of what you've said about that rusting heap is considered arrant nonsense. 'C&RWG has a problematic drive shaft?' Using other people's namespace is clearly bad form, and we'll all frown at such oafish behaviour. But it's also very risky in practice, since you're throwing yourself (and the intelligibility of what you say) on the mercy of others. Damian
Received on Sunday, 9 October 2005 20:30:35 UTC