[MD] MOQ key issues vote/survey

[ian glendinning]

DM, Craig, Krim ...

This is key ... I'd have no problem "agreeing a definition" for four
useful working layers as positied by Pirsig, provided we don't them
forget that all the other sub-layers may also exist, and that the four
layers we chose in the first place were just pragmatic - based on
experience to date, nothing fundamental (beyond the aspects mentioned
earlier - the evolutionary axis, and the quality ontological medium.)

Ontologies are "deemed" .... never fundamental.
Ian
(PS I still happen to think distinct definitions of 3 and 4 are going
to be difficult on the current lines .... but that's a "local
difficulty")

On 3/6/08, craigerb at comcast.net <craigerb at comcast.net> wrote:
> DM,
> I vote:
> The four levels are mutually exclusive & exhaustive.
> Any other way-of-dividing-the-levels (to which I see no limit)
> just creates sub-levels within the original 4.
> Craig
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>