- From: Bill dehOra <BdehOra@interx.com>
- Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 15:38:42 -0000
- To: "'Sean B. Palmer'" <sean@mysterylights.com>, Bill dehOra <BdehOra@interx.com>, "'Aaron Swartz'" <aswartz@upclink.com>, RDF Comments <www-rdf-comments@w3.org>, RDF Interest <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
: Sean B. Palmer: : :Don't forget that the SW aim is that eventually both A and B can :convert their systems from using "a" schema to "aa" schema :automtically by semantic botostrapping. Yep, that's why I said I wanted to ignore discovery ... different architectural issue. :O.K.... let's say A uses "a", and B uses "a". Now, C comes along with :"aa". A tries to read something of C's (written in aa), but can't. :Luckily either the aa schema has assertions about how it relates to :"a", allowing A and B to upgrade, or these assertions are found in a :third party index (ahem...SWAG...ahem). This is the hard bit. I call it metalinking. Very long links imply issues with semantic drift. I think this will solved out of band by people hand tuning stuff for some time to come ... no bad thing really. :Versioning is good... but I thought that part of the SW was how to get :around versioning? Couldn't say, automation seems to the main goal. Bill de hOra
Received on Thursday, 22 February 2001 10:39:27 UTC