Re: terminology for purple numbers

[Eugene Eric Kim <eekim@eekim.com>]

On Wed, 1 Aug 2001, Eric Armstrong wrote:    (01)

> At the moment, since we are still living in a document-centric
> universe, I agree that paths appear to be unique. But when
> we move to the next stage, where we combine existing nodes and
> reuse them (for example, in the kind of "reorganized dialog"
> that is necessary for actually reaching discernible conclusions
> in an online discussion) then paths will no longer even appear
> to be unique. They will only be unique with the context of a
> given document (view).    (02)

True enough.  For the record, this is also true of NIDs, not just of
paths.    (03)

In fact, I ran into this very problem when adding purple numbers to my web
site.  I documented this problem in my purple numbers case study paper:    (04)

    http://www.eekim.com/cgi-bin/dkr?fn=/ohs/purplecasestudy.html#sid074    (05)

The web doesn't currently have support for transclusions (except for
images), but my internal templating system does.  If I transclude two
separate source documents onto a single HTML page, I run the risk of
ID-clash as Eric described.  I got around this by not transcluding
multiple source documents onto a single page.  In theory, I could hash a
document's URL and include it in the granular address, but in practice,
it's not worth the trouble right now.    (06)

(Incidentally, I need to update that paper's contents as well as my
software to use the new terms that Murray and I have agreed on (nid and
hid), thanks to some very constructive feedback from you guys.)    (07)

-Eugene    (08)

-- 
+=== Eugene Eric Kim ===== eekim@eekim.com ===== http://www.eekim.com/ ===+
|       "Writer's block is a fancy term made up by whiners so they        |
+=====  can have an excuse to drink alcohol."  --Steve Martin  ===========+    (09)