- From: Williams, Stuart (HP Labs, Bristol) <skw@hp.com>
- Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 15:57:13 +0000
- To: Xiaoshu Wang <wangxiao@musc.edu>
- CC: "Sean B. Palmer" <sean@miscoranda.com>, "david@dbooth.org" <david@dbooth.org>, "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>
Xiasho, > -----Original Message----- > From: Xiaoshu Wang [mailto:wangxiao@musc.edu] > Sent: 18 June 2009 16:31 > To: Williams, Stuart (HP Labs, Bristol) > Cc: Sean B. Palmer; david@dbooth.org; www-tag@w3.org > Subject: Re: Fwd: Splitting vs. Interpreting > > Williams, Stuart (HP Labs, Bristol) wrote: > > Xaioshu, > > > > > >> The real issue is that TAG, for whatever reason that I cannot > >> understand, refuses to acknowledge such a simple truth: what you get > >> from a URI is NOT what a URI denotes. > >> > > > > Please will you stop making this claim. You and I have > > visited this many times [and (no-doubt) bored many people on > > this list] and agreed that no-one[*] on the TAG holds the > > view that "what you get from a URI is what a URI denotes". > > You again start your argument by restating a false-premise, > > that the TAG holds a position that AFAICT it never held > > whilst I was a part of it. > > > > Stuart > > -- > > [*] by which I mean that I know of no-one on the TAG that > > holds the view which you imply. > > > I am not implying everyone but I do imply someone because, otherwise, I > just could not understand: what is the hold up for even an > open debate? Well... http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch is pretty clear in its one and only diagram that what is obtained from the web are awww:representation of a resource as opposed to the resource itself. I think that accords with your position. > I have to file a serious complain in order to get my manuscript accepted > to the IR-KR2009, which I am glad the PC chairs did. One reviewer, whom > I was told is a very "well known person" to the web community that they > must respect, made some very unfair (as far as from I can understand) > comments. My impression is that the reviewer just simply did not want > my opinion to be out there. I can make no comment. However, FWIW as was not involved in the review process at all. > This makes me very upset because something must be *seriously* wrong. > Here is what I wrote to the PC chairs of IR-KR2009, I think the problem > should concern us all. > > "I remember Bertrand Russell explained the difference between Religion > and Philosophy. He said they both differ from science because they are > all about speculations. But the former appeals to authority and the > latter to human reason. There are some unhealthy trend in the Web and > it becomes more religious than philosophical -- this really concerns > us. One of the purpose of this article is trying to make it right. Not > that my opinion is right, this is minor but what is important is to > evaluate alternative opinion through intelligent debate but by > obedience. It really surprises me that one person has so much power and > can control even a workshop. > > Honestly, I am not simply disappointed. I am actually quite angry and > seriously concerned -- not for my own sake but for the sake of the Web > community. Hopefully, we will not turn the Web philosophy into a Web > religion." Fair enough... but you cannot make a valid argument by attributing a position to a group that it does not hold (and AFAIK never has). > Xiaoshu Stuart --
Received on Thursday, 18 June 2009 15:58:33 UTC