• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• To: xml-dev@x...
• Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 08:36:19 -0500

I am remembering an email from someone 
who said they wished they would never 
see the "S" word in another XML discussion. 

Semantic always gets us wrapped around the 
axle of philosphical interpretation of meaning. 
It is impossible to test except that at the 
end of the discussion, parties state that they 
think they agree.  Sort of signatory binding...

I agree with the person who sent the message 
that the term semantic probably ought to be 
banned by mutual exhaustion.

What if instead of "semantic web" which 
sounds more like magic than computer science, 
vision over substance, polemic over logic, 
we used the terms "services-based web" so 
we can get it out of the world of declarative 
contracting and into the world of predictable, 
reliable transactions.

It might not sell to Joe Q waiting for the 
next 'nicks game, but at least the developers 
would have a clearer goal to meet.

Len Bullard
Intergraph Public Safety
clbullar@i...
http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard

Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h

• Prev by Date: RE: Improved writing -- who's going to pay for it?
• Next by Date: RELAX to ISO
• Previous by thread: DOM (level 1): moving elements from one document to another
• Next by thread: RE: Terminology Shift: Ban Semantic Web
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread