I often get caught making smart-ass comments that much of our "problem" expecting to reach definitive conclusions on any aspect of MoQ .... is basically linguistic. Some of you don't find this helpful ;-)
In my real day-job life, I spend a lot of time on (effectively) linguistics .... standardizing terminologies shared between businesses .... and often find myself preaching to people not to expect to find one language to suit (literally) all situations unambiguously. Those with high expectations don't always find that helpful either. Hey ho. One thought that often springs to mind, is Doug Renselle's idiosyncratic quest to develop and promote MoQ ... where he has his own invented language, to distinguish specific MoQish uses of terms from everyday use. I hear myself saying "it'll never work Doug" ... and invoke Wittgenstein's "private language" argument, but .... an open question ... Does anyone see value in working towards a MOQish language ? Ian 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/md/archives.html
