[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] Indexes: Main | Date | Thread | Author

Re: [ba-ohs-talk] Concept: Typed Versioning

Lee Iverson wrote:    (01)

> On Thu, 2002-03-21 at 17:08, Eric Armstrong wrote:
> > I see link types as something the user controls. ...The user
> > sets a link type as one of (for example) response, counter-argument,
> > inline inclusion, simple reference, like that. The way the system displays
> > linked material is primarily determined by those types, and also controlled
> > by the user.
> These are clearly "semantic" categories and would have to reference some
> sort of external ontological structure...  There is a possibility of
> building these on top of more structural link types: dated vs. undated,
> direct vs. relative, etc.    (02)

In my view, that is correct. My impression of  them is something that
would want to be built in at a higher level, in the engine that uses Nodal.    (03)

When Eugene speaks of "link types", however, I think he has something
slightly different in mind. I remember that there was a difference from
past conversations, but don't recall what it was sufficiently well to
represent his point of view. (So there may still be aspect of the concept
that needs to be built in at a deeper level, as part of a Nodal engine, or
something similar.    (04)