[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [obix] Contract questions
The renaming is all that I could see was happening with the previous discussion. If the things I think of as ‘apples’ are known as ‘oranges’ to everyone else, I am fine to start calling the ‘oranges’; it does
not change what they are. I didn’t see that there was any fundamental change in the objects from our discussion. There is still a single thing which references an OBIX object by its URI. Then there is a space-separated sequence of these things. The sequence
is what is the value of the “is” attribute. It still just seems simpler to call them “contract”, and “contract list”, respectively. From: obix@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:obix@lists.oasis-open.org]
On Behalf Of Considine, Toby I agree. I think you [Craig] are renaming the existing complexity rather than reaching through to simpler language. Probably too close. Forest / Trees. tc “It is the theory that decides what can be observed." —Albert Einstein
From:
obix@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:obix@lists.oasis-open.org]
On Behalf Of William Cox I think this is making it more complex than needed. William Cox Email:
wtcox@CoxSoftwareArchitects.com Web:
http://www.CoxSoftwareArchitects.com +1 862 485 3696 mobile On 5/12/15 4:49 PM, Gemmill, Craig wrote:
|
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]