Re: [DotGNU]Implement RDF in a Universal Data Structure

[Seth Johnson]

James Michael DuPont wrote:
> 
> Well put norbert.
> 
> Seth, I am also a bit wary about the "universal nature" of this CTP
> myself.


To "universal application server" and "universal data structure," add:
"universal state transfer."

Sheesh, I was just going to shut up and lurk.  After this note, I will.

Proving it's universal is not the problem.  When you see it and have it
explained you see what it's about and how intuitive it is.  There's a very
simple, analytical way to explain it that would make the case very simply,
but that would reveal too much.

I told Norbert that I would reply to his comments awhile back, but I dropped
that, because I have profound respect for GNU and DotGNU -- more than many
people here know -- and because I don't want an object case to be made out
of my proposition (i.e., an opportunity to demonstrate how GNU handles
software patents, how GNU handles apparently pipedream stuff, and so on).

Truly, the important thing in this forum is to complete the delivery of
DotGNU.

I've explained as much as I could, but I've already explained that this is
something that should only be revealed when certain apps are done with it
and ready; then it needs to be spread far and wide, as fast as it can be,
before a counterstrike occurs.  Once CTP is delivered, most if not all of
GNU's purposes can really be realized, by the process of simple
demonstration that a *universal application server* and a *universal data
structure* makes possible.

I guess I might note here that even though I've shown it to some people, I
am not coding it in C or anything in the free family -- I'm a freaking dBASE
dinosaur!  The result is that, it would *still* require secrecy even when
people look at it in a serious way, just to convert the code to something
that doesn't depend on an unfree VM, as dBASE (dBL) code does.

Now I shall LURK again!  LOL

Seth Johnson


> 
> --- Norbert Bollow <address@hidden> wrote:
> > Postulating theorems is relatively easy; the hard part is to show
> > that the claims are true.  Also note that with every instance of
> > "universal" that you introduce into your claims, you make that
> > difficult task *much* harder.  If you can introduce one instance of
> > "universal" into your claim and still prove it while at the same time
> > having a practically useful system, I will consider your
> > accomplishment worthy of a Nobel prize.  However your claim contains
> > even two instances of "universal" ("universal application server" and
> > "universal data structure"), that makes it totally outrageous in my
> > eyes.  I think it's much more likely that it will turn out that there
> > is a pretty general (but not universal) data structure and a way to
> > do
> > something worthwhile (but pretty specialized) with it.
> 
> mike
> 
> =====
> James Michael DuPont
> http://introspector.sourceforge.net/
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more
> http://tax.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> Developers mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://dotgnu.org/mailman/listinfo/developers

-- 

DRM is Theft!  We are the Stakeholders!

New Yorkers for Fair Use
http://www.nyfairuse.org

[CC] Counter-copyright: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/cc/cc.html

I reserve no rights restricting copying, modification or distribution of
this incidentally recorded communication.  Original authorship should be
attributed reasonably, but only so far as such an expectation might hold for
usual practice in ordinary social discourse to which one holds no claim of
exclusive rights.