- From: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
- Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 11:51:32 +0000
- To: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
- Cc: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, <www-archive@w3.org>
At 01:43 PM 1/30/02 +0200, Patrick Stickler wrote:
>This was not what I was saying.
>
>I was saying
>
> Proposal A (TDL) is broken for reason of problem B ("Duh!").
> There is no problem B.
> Proposal A is not broken.
>
> > Roughly, you have to consider the wider picture, you can't just pick off
> > problems in isolation.
>
>Never did. You seem to have misunderstood me.
>
>Is the above now clearer?
Clearer, but I don't accept that there is no problem with self-entailment
in TDL as currently presented.
I think TDL possibly can be fixed (and have sent some ideas to Jememy), but
until it is fixed it isn't in my mind a fully fledged proposal.
#g
------------------------------------------------------------
Graham Klyne MIMEsweeper Group
Strategic Research <http://www.mimesweeper.com>
<Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
__
/\ \
/ \ \
/ /\ \ \
/ / /\ \ \
/ / /__\_\ \
/ / /________\
\/___________/
Received on Wednesday, 30 January 2002 07:00:44 UTC