I just found an excellent article on the subject of identity:
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/identity/
It is heavy reading. But it does give an excellent overview of the
subject.
I can't say that I managed in a couple of hours to fully digest all
the information
in there.
Henry
On 22
On 5/21/05, Henry Story <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 22 May 2005, at 02:27, Robert Sayre wrote:
> > On 5/21/05, Bob Wyman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Robert Sayre wrote:
> >>
> >>> Temporal order of what? They are all the same entry, so what is it
> >>> you are temporally ordering?
> >>>
On 22 May 2005, at 02:27, Robert Sayre wrote:
On 5/21/05, Bob Wyman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Robert Sayre wrote:
Temporal order of what? They are all the same entry, so what is it
you are temporally ordering?
We are discussing the temporal ordering of multiple non-
identical
*ins
On 5/21/05, Bob Wyman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Robert Sayre wrote:
> > Temporal order of what? They are all the same entry, so what is it
> > you are temporally ordering?
> We are discussing the temporal ordering of multiple non-identical
> *instances* of a single Atom entry. It is com
Robert Sayre wrote:
> Temporal order of what? They are all the same entry, so what is it
> you are temporally ordering?
We are discussing the temporal ordering of multiple non-identical
*instances* of a single Atom entry. It is common in the realm of software
engineering to deal with this
On 22 May 2005, at 01:27, Robert Sayre wrote:
On 5/21/05, Bob Wyman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Robert Sayre wrote:
So, it's about disambiguating versions of an entry, right?
No. It has nothing to do with "versions" or even
"variants." I have
explained that on numerous occasions.
On 5/21/05, Bob Wyman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Robert Sayre wrote:
> > So, it's about disambiguating versions of an entry, right?
> No. It has nothing to do with "versions" or even "variants." I have
> explained that on numerous occasions. The denial of relevance to the issue
> of "ver
Robert Sayre wrote:
> So, it's about disambiguating versions of an entry, right?
No. It has nothing to do with "versions" or even "variants." I have
explained that on numerous occasions. The denial of relevance to the issue
of "version" is even in the title of this thread. Read: "atom:modi
On 5/21/05, Bob Wyman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I wrote:
> >> I believe this was communicated when I wrote:
> >> "Atom should support atom:modified to permit the temporal-ordering of
> >> members of sets that share the same atom:id and atom:updated values."
>
> Robert Sayre wrote:
> >
I wrote:
>> I believe this was communicated when I wrote:
>> "Atom should support atom:modified to permit the temporal-ordering of
>> members of sets that share the same atom:id and atom:updated values."
Robert Sayre wrote:
> No, that's not what you communicated. How can I temporally orde
On 5/21/05, Bob Wyman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Robert Sayre wrote:
> > What does atom:id have to do with temporal ordering?
> Absolutely nothing.
> Atom:id is used to identify sets of entry instances which, according
> to the Atom specification, should be considered "the same e
Robert Sayre wrote:
> What does atom:id have to do with temporal ordering?
Absolutely nothing.
Atom:id is used to identify sets of entry instances which, according
to the Atom specification, should be considered "the same entry". Sets
composed of instances of "the same entry" can t
On 22/5/05 7:49 AM, "Robert Sayre" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Atom should support atom:modified to permit the temporal-ordering of
>> members of sets that share the same atom:id and atom:updated values. This
>> has nothing to do with versioning.
>
> What does atom:id have to do with t
On 5/21/05, Bob Wyman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Robert Sayre wrote:
> Atom should support atom:modified to permit the temporal-ordering of
> members of sets that share the same atom:id and atom:updated values. This
> has nothing to do with versioning.
What does atom:id have to do with
14 matches
Mail list logo
