<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>Phil Dawes' Stuff - Latest Comments in Meaning and identity</title><link>http://phildawesstuff.disqus.com/</link><description></description><atom:link href="https://phildawesstuff.disqus.com/meaning_and_identity/latest.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 May 2006 05:05:39 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Meaning and identity</title><link>http://www.phildawes.net/blog/2006/03/09/meaning-and-identity/#comment-2753265</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I agree with your statement that GUID scheme scalling universaly is a new kind of utopia.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;My view point is not directly linked to application of unique ids in RFF though. I believe this is the case for a larger scope of which the semantic web is one part...&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I believe you have layed out sensible arguments in your post. If we now take the bad scalability of GUID schemes as a real world's fact, I can conclude that the real world will ultimately rely on a complex mesh of separate GUID schemes (we already have the premices of it, right ;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;We would need some ways to reconcile these schemes where they intersect. What are your views on how this kind of reconcilation can be modeled with the current semantic tools?&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Jean-Louis Seguineau</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 15 May 2006 05:05:39 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>