[sc34wg3] SAM-issue term-subject-identity

[Lars Marius Garshol]

* Marc de Graauw
| 
| Identity is not a notion of strong resemblance, like in 'identical
| twins', it is a notion of being a single thing. So either one
| subject is identical (which is a tautology) or two subjects are not
| identical (which is a tautology too). 

This expresses my dissatisfaction with this term very well. I feel
that the term doesn't really convey what it's meant to convey, and
that its definition defines something other than what it should,
probably because this has been poorly understood.

The subject and the subject's identity so close to being the same
thing that I don't think that's what we're really concerned with.  I
think what this term is trying to say is that there is something that
formally declares the subject of a topic. So a term like "formal
subject declaration" or "formal subject identification" would probably
be more appropriate.

But even so we need a use case...
 
| Since the definition is broken anyway, and their is no clear need
| for it, I suggest it be dropped.

I wouldn't put it quite so strongly, but it would be nice if those in
favour could try to explain to us what the term is intended to mean.
How do you use it? What does it say when you use it?

(One tip: your postings would be more readable if you limited the
quotes in each, used indentation to identify them, and used URI
references instead of quotes whereever possible. Just FYI.)

-- 
Lars Marius Garshol, Ontopian         <URL: http://www.ontopia.net >
ISO SC34/WG3, OASIS GeoLang TC        <URL: http://www.garshol.priv.no >