• From: Peter Hunsberger <peter.hunsberger@g...>
• To: "Cox, Bruce" <Bruce.Cox@u...>
• Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 11:13:17 -0600

On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 9:54 AM, Cox, Bruce <Bruce.Cox@u...> wrote:
> I won't comment on the success or failure of RDF, but it seems to me
> that it's highly abstract, not necessarily highly generic.

Ok, I'll bite.  What's the difference?  (Seriously...)

> What is a generic vocabulary?  One that serves too many masters?  Poorly
> focused?  Become confused in the minds of consumers as referring to a
> whole class of (vocabularies | schemas) rather than just the one?
>
> Bruce B Cox
-- 
Peter Hunsberger

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: RE: Keep business-process-specific data separate?
    • From: "Michael Kay" <mike@s...>

• References:
  • RE: RE: Keep business-process-specific data separate?
    • From: "Cox, Bruce" <Bruce.Cox@U...>