# Re: Re SGML URC spec comments

Brian Behlendorf (brian@organic.com)
Sun, 25 Jun 1995 21:09:27 -0700 (PDT)

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Kee Hinckley: "Re: Agent-mediated access (was Re: Criticism of Kidcode...)"
- Previous message: Brian Behlendorf: "Re: Re SGML URC spec comments"
- In reply to: Terry Allen: "Re: Re SGML URC spec comments"
- Next in thread: Paul Hoffman: "Re: Re SGML URC spec comments"

    Date: Sun, 25 Jun 1995 21:09:27 -0700 (PDT)

    From: Brian Behlendorf <brian@organic.com>

    Subject: Re: Re SGML URC spec comments

    To: Terry Allen <terry@ora.com>

    In-Reply-To: <9506251933.ZM27135@dmg.west.ora.com>

    Message-Id: <Pine.3.89.9506252026.h10466-0100000@eat.organic.com>

On Sun, 25 Jun 1995, Terry Allen wrote:
> In any event, *I'm* questioning the
> right of anybody, without permission, to overlay their speech on
> documents I publish on the Web.

To that I agree, but how the user agent decides to implement global
annotations and SOAPs is crucial to this issue. I don't remember hearing
about it in the context of being a transparent overlay that would replace
text like a series of "diff"-style patches. That's editing, not annotating -
the ability for me as a reader of the document to put "I don't agree" next to
an exact sentence in a document is completely different from my ability to
erase it and write something new. I as the commentator would want my words
to be shown as distinctly different from the author's words as possible. A
browser that didn't make that distinction would be useless.

> this
> is about whether publishers on the Web will be allowed to control
> the conditions under which their information is presented. You can
> be certain that if they cannot do that with present technology they
> will be in the market for future technology that allows them to.

In other words, a closed technology using closed addressing and
transmission protocols which would prohibit attaching any useful
metainformation. Yes, that's a danger. This hasn't seemed to keep
companies from posting marketing materials to USENET though. :) In fact
every one of our clients wants threaded discussion boards in one form or
another...

Brian

--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--
brian@organic.com brian@hyperreal.com http://www.[hyperreal,organic].com/

- Next message: Kee Hinckley: "Re: Agent-mediated access (was Re: Criticism of Kidcode...)"
- Previous message: Brian Behlendorf: "Re: Re SGML URC spec comments"
- In reply to: Terry Allen: "Re: Re SGML URC spec comments"
- Next in thread: Paul Hoffman: "Re: Re SGML URC spec comments"