- From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 01:24:47 +0200
- To: noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
- Cc: Stuart Williams <skw@hp.com>, www-tag@w3.org
On Thursday, October 14, 2004, 9:51:39 PM, noah wrote: nuic> Perhaps it's worth noting that our current editors draft says [1] nuic> TRUE per Basel Definition: "The distinguishing nuic> characteristic of these [information] resources is that nuic> all of their essential characteristics can be conveyed in a message." nuic> but it does NOT say the converse: nuic> FALSE per Basel Definition: "A non-information resource is distinguished nuic> by the fact that none of its state can be conveyed in a message." Yes, exactly. And that is good and I am comfortable with it. nuic> We shouldn't be surprised that there is some machine-representable state nuic> for a real live shaggy dog. I'm not. But (see earlier threads on testability) saying that an IR is any resource for which there exists any information whatsoever is equivalent to saying IR == resource, thus making it a useless and meaningless term. nuic> We might choose to expose its temperature or nuic> its weight, for example. The distinction drawn in Basel is that dogs are nuic> interestingly different from information resources because there exist nuic> essential aspects of the dog that are not conveyable in a machine-readable nuic> way. Yes and this was a distinction that I was happy to see made, and stopped opposing the term IR because it was now both useful and testable. nuic> Noah nuic> [1] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/webarch/#id-resources (I don't think I have nuic> a stable link in date space for this, unfortunately) nuic> -------------------------------------- nuic> Noah Mendelsohn nuic> IBM Corporation nuic> One Rogers Street nuic> Cambridge, MA 02142 nuic> 1-617-693-4036 nuic> -------------------------------------- -- Chris Lilley mailto:chris@w3.org Chair, W3C SVG Working Group Member, W3C Technical Architecture Group
Received on Thursday, 14 October 2004 23:24:48 UTC