• To: 'Bill de hOra' <dehora@e...>, xml-dev@l...
• Subject: RE: Categories of Web Service messages: data-oriented vs action-oriented
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2002 08:40:31 -0600

If it follows the normal human pattern, it becomes a reference group 
vocabulary and exhibits some drift over time.  In heavy use, 
it is barely stable but that is ok and precisely why one 
wants it to stay out of the transport.   One may not want to 
standardize these as much as be able to capture them and keep 
them organized for some period.  Standardization is a brittle 
notion when applied to living languages.  The interesting stuff 
is the overlaps of the reference group vocabularies because 
a pattern of cross-group transactions emerges and is worth 
knowing about.  Some aspects of drift are driven by the 
overlaps making a thesaurus a maintenance bear.  It will 
be interesting to see how much work is involved in maintaining 
a topic map system.

len

-----Original Message-----
From: Bill de hOra [mailto:dehora@e...]

I think standardizing on message semantics will takes years and years.

• Prev by Date: Re: Categories of Web Service messages: data-oriented vs action-oriented
• Next by Date: Re: A heavier-weight proposal for character entitydefinition
• Previous by thread: Re: Categories of Web Service messages: data-oriented vs action-oriented
• Next by thread: RE: Categories of Web Service messages: data-oriented vs action-oriented
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread