- From: Miles Sabin <miles@milessabin.com>
- Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 00:20:42 +0100
- To: www-tag@w3.org
Tim Bray wrote, > So unless you have some other way of getting at it (ratio between > circumference and diameter, integral of 1/x, square root of 2) you'll > never get a name, which means that it just isn't a resource (a thing > that has identity), so the world-view is kind of consistent. Maybe it's not a Resource as far as RFC 2396 is concerned, but it doesn't follow from that that it's not "a thing with identity" ... a lot of math and logic would be, <ahem/>, awkward otherwise. Presumably you'd have to deny, (Vx)(x = x) where the quantifier ranges over the reals: most of them are nameless, so, if RFC 2396 is to be believed, identity is ... what? Undefined? > Think of all those poor nameless reals... that's a special kind of > loneliness. -Tim Not at all. The nameless things *far* outnumber the named. Cheers, Miles
Received on Thursday, 29 August 2002 19:21:14 UTC