• To: 'bryan' <bry@i...>, xml-dev@l...
• Subject: RE: On permathreads
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 11:33:42 -0600

Permathreads are usually based on polar debates. 
As said elsewhere, polarities are not solved, 
they are managed.  So you may be on to something.

However, technically, a polarity in which each 
extreme wants a different solution in a shared 
space has the potential to destabilize whatever 
interoperation we believe we have achieved.  So 
we have to keep on looking for a topic that 
leads to a consensus.   If what you are suggesting 
is topic management, the topic maps guys are 
looking for you. ;-)

len

-----Original Message-----
From: bryan [mailto:bry@i...]

Given that people recognize that there are these things called
permathreads how will we go about ordering them? It seems to me that
xml-dev should be the one list where it would be possible to abstract up
to the next level and provide some tools/possibilities for permathread
management? 

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: On permathreads
    • From: "bryan" <bry@i...>

• Prev by Date: Re: On permathreads
• Next by Date: Re: Parsing efficiency? - why not 'compile'????
• Previous by thread: RE: Pure syntax vs the Infoset permathread (was Re: [xm l-dev] The subsetting has begun)
• Next by thread: RE: On permathreads
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread