Quoting Paul Hammant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Peter, > me: > >>I don't get it. You use words, but then when someone wants to provide an > >>explanation of the words (or asks you to do so), you think the words are > >>too 'generic' or 'vague' to be explanatory....which means your use of > >>the words would also be too 'generic' and 'vague'. > >> > >> > > pd: > >No - the usage of words is context sensitive. The more generic a word, the > > >more context sensitive usages it will have. Thats why I suggested that we > >adopt non-generic words and apply specific definitions to them (as that way > > >we could definitions in the context of Avalon discussions). However no one > > >seemed to want that ;) > >
FYI: I get it now =) ph: > That is not true, there are many that would like to see a concise set of > well defined and carefully used terms. I happen to be against the use > of new terms, but for the use of concise ones. me too; and I add I am willing to accept 'new' terms (within avalon, not within computing as a whole......) if it guarantees there will be sufficiently more concise ones as a result.... cheers, - LSD -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
