[sc34wg3] The Norwegian National Body position on ISO 13250

[Lars Marius Garshol]

* James David Mason
| 
| I've heard a few people complain that the SAM is oriented too much
| to vendors' needs. To that I can only reply, "What's wrong with
| that?"

If it's *too* much, it's not good. It would be helpful to have an
explanation of what the problem is, and what can be done about it,
however.

| | One possibility is that the SAM is not sufficiently clear on some
| useful points. Last week, someone remarked to me that there's a
| point related to uniqueness of topics and the impact on merging that
| he thought might be implicit in the SAM but wasn't explicit. If it's
| a useful idea and the SAM can be tweaked, then let's get that on the
| table. If it's a fix worth doing, let's get it done and get on to
| other work.

Yes!
 
| If there are glaring holes in the SAM, if there are obvious areas
| where the SAM won't work, we need to have them
| identified. Otherwise, we need to work with what we know and
| standardize on that basis.

Again, yes. If anyone has a complaint, please put it forward, and
please do it as soon as possible.
 
| If the RM cannot perform the semantic standardization of what it
| means to be a TM and what it means to merge TMs, then the SAM will
| have little choice other than to become self-sufficient.

It already is. I think, though I am not certain, that what was
proposed by Michel and SRN was to change that and make it depend on
the RM.

-- 
Lars Marius Garshol, Ontopian         <URL: http://www.ontopia.net >
GSM: +47 98 21 55 50                  <URL: http://www.garshol.priv.no >