- From: Aaron Swartz <me@aaronsw.com>
- Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 17:28:14 -0500
- To: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>, RDF-Interest <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
To recap: TimBL is #2, RoyF is #3 and "it's both!" is #4. > I think there's a very important tactical situation here. #4 subsumes #2 and > #3, so if we want interoperation between systems made by believers in #2 > (like TimBL) and those made by believers in #3 (like AaronSw, I think), we > have to use #4. Careful. TimBL can define his HTTP URIs to be anything, including his notion of a document. #3 interoperates fine with that, although it doesn't go the other way (#2 can't deal with #3 believers). > Maybe I should just ask -- what can we do to prevent people from writing RDF > in styles #3 and #4? If you're someone who does that or wants to do that, > how can we convince you not to? That's rather cheeky. It seems that you and TimBL are in the minority here, arguing against people like RoyF, MarkN, MarkB and DanC. I think you need a better argument than "my belief can't co-exist with yours". Believing that all URIs identify scrambled eggs doesn't interoperate either, that doesn't mean that we all have to agree with it. -- [ "Aaron Swartz" ; <mailto:me@aaronsw.com> ; <http://www.aaronsw.com/> ]
Received on Monday, 15 April 2002 18:28:18 UTC