Re: stepping backward (one more step)

Graham Klyne wrote:

> Is it really needed, or important, that the same equivalence rule is used
> for both of these purposes?  Could we stick with string-equivalence for
> distinguishing among peers, but "absolutized" name matching for linkage to
> connotations?  Is it really harmful if some namespaces appear different at
> a purely syntactic level, even if they actually refer to the same connotations?

Perhaps not.  But do you think it harmless if some namespaces appear the
*same* at a purely syntactic level (both being named "foo") while referring
to entirely different connotations?

-- 

Schlingt dreifach einen Kreis um dies! || John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com>
Schliesst euer Aug vor heiliger Schau,  || http://www.reutershealth.com
Denn er genoss vom Honig-Tau,           || http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
Und trank die Milch vom Paradies.            -- Coleridge (tr. Politzer)

Received on Monday, 5 June 2000 09:45:37 UTC