• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: RE: Co-operating with Architectural Forms
• From: Sean McGrath <sean.mcgrath@p...>
• Date: Fri, 01 Feb 2002 07:52:23 +0000
• In-reply-to: <5.1.0.14.2.20020201073629.00a81140@p...>
• References: <0a4501c1aab2$1a5eb700$0a2e249b@n...><5.1.0.14.2.20020131083303.02814c60@p...><E16WOTI-000802-00@s...><0a1d01c1aaa1$2093ac90$0a2e249b@n...><E16WPvQ-00033e-00@s...>

The mind-game came out a bit mind-blowing thanks to a typo.
Heres a fix:

[Jonathan Borden]

>>What is the myth? "isa" links have been used forever. A "name" is a
>>character string, right, what is open to interpretation? But please tell me
>>about this "thing" that is different from its "name". I suspect that if you
>>can describe it with enough precision that the answer to these issues will
>>become apparent. For example do you wish to describe each and every element
>>that exists in the entire universe as a distinct "it" that "has-a" set of
>>properties. That would be tedious.

And phenomenological to boot.

Mind game: Imagine a UML tool where all classes are instances of a single
uber-class with an attribute called "type". Feeling queasy yet? Try 
Smalltalk:-)

Sean

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Co-operating with Architectural Forms
    • From: John Cowan <cowan@m...>

• References:
  • RE: Co-operating with Architectural Forms
    • From: Sean McGrath <sean.mcgrath@p...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Co-operating with Architectural Forms
• Next by Date: Usage of Escape Character instead of CDATA
• Previous by thread: RE: Co-operating with Architectural Forms
• Next by thread: Re: Co-operating with Architectural Forms
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread