[log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Now along come namespace URIs and we can
> 1) come up with an unbiguous ID for the thing called by many names 2)
> provide some conceptual unity to that category. You then come along and
> tell me that such category creation through naming is really not
> anything more than sugar and to really establish an identifiable
> category of things I have to turn to yet another mechanism (obscure RDF
> constructs).
They're hardly obscure and they need not be RDF. Here's the point I'm
making:
We're naming things, and their names can never be changed. We can choose to
give them long and informative names or simple and short ones, with the
information put off to the side. We can change the information, but we can't
change the name.
Here's the question: Do you name your child:
Boy-Who-Lives-in-Kansas-City-and-Does-Well-In-Math-and-is-a-Member-of-the-Tr
ack-Team or Tom, and give people the other information when they ask for it?
> I'm left with the feeling that we're creating an
> infrastructure only understandable by us geeks.
I disagree, this is a very real-world decision we're making.
--
[ Aaron Swartz | [log in to unmask] | http://www.aaronsw.com ]
|