parid0463 | Fri, 3 Jan 2003 11:06:43
When Steve says the RM is for someone who
wants to "achieve subject location uniqueness for subjects that are
specified by domain-specific relationship types", he's using language that's
way out in philosophical territory, not something that sounds like the
specification of "Document Description and Processing Languages" (with
emphasis on "languages"). How can you write a conformance specification to
something like that (and if you can't specify conformance, you're not
writing a standard)? Graham's  message, which he placed outside this thread,
is appropriate: (to oversimplify greatly) we need a formula for getting from
the RM to the SAM and back.
parid0463 | Fri, 3 Jan 2003 11:06:43
When Steve says the RM is for someone who
wants to "achieve subject location uniqueness for subjects that are
specified by domain-specific relationship types", he's using language that's
way out in philosophical territory, not something that sounds like the
specification of "Document Description and Processing Languages" (with
emphasis on "languages"). How can you write a conformance specification to
something like that (and if you can't specify conformance, you're not
writing a standard)? Graham's  message, which he placed outside this thread,
is appropriate: (to oversimplify greatly) we need a formula for getting from
the RM to the SAM and back.
parid0463 | Fri, 3 Jan 2003 11:06:43
When Steve says the RM is for someone who
wants to "achieve subject location uniqueness for subjects that are
specified by domain-specific relationship types", he's using language that's
way out in philosophical territory, not something that sounds like the
specification of "Document Description and Processing Languages" (with
emphasis on "languages"). How can you write a conformance specification to
something like that (and if you can't specify conformance, you're not
writing a standard)? Graham's  message, which he placed outside this thread,
is appropriate: (to oversimplify greatly) we need a formula for getting from
the RM to the SAM and back.
parid0463 | Fri, 3 Jan 2003 11:06:43
When Steve says the RM is for someone who
wants to "achieve subject location uniqueness for subjects that are
specified by domain-specific relationship types", he's using language that's
way out in philosophical territory, not something that sounds like the
specification of "Document Description and Processing Languages" (with
emphasis on "languages"). How can you write a conformance specification to
something like that (and if you can't specify conformance, you're not
writing a standard)? Graham's  message, which he placed outside this thread,
is appropriate: (to oversimplify greatly) we need a formula for getting from
the RM to the SAM and back.
parid0463 | Fri, 3 Jan 2003 11:06:43
When Steve says the RM is for someone who
wants to "achieve subject location uniqueness for subjects that are
specified by domain-specific relationship types", he's using language that's
way out in philosophical territory, not something that sounds like the
specification of "Document Description and Processing Languages" (with
emphasis on "languages"). How can you write a conformance specification to
something like that (and if you can't specify conformance, you're not
writing a standard)? Graham's  message, which he placed outside this thread,
is appropriate: (to oversimplify greatly) we need a formula for getting from
the RM to the SAM and back.
parid0463 | Fri, 3 Jan 2003 11:06:43
When Steve says the RM is for someone who
wants to "achieve subject location uniqueness for subjects that are
specified by domain-specific relationship types", he's using language that's
way out in philosophical territory, not something that sounds like the
specification of "Document Description and Processing Languages" (with
emphasis on "languages"). How can you write a conformance specification to
something like that (and if you can't specify conformance, you're not
writing a standard)? Graham's  message, which he placed outside this thread,
is appropriate: (to oversimplify greatly) we need a formula for getting from
the RM to the SAM and back.