[sc34wg3] The role of the RM

[Patrick Durusau]

Steve,

Steve Pepper wrote:

> At 12:36 04.02.2003 -0500, Patrick Durusau wrote:
>
>> It would be helpful if you could say "why" the RM would delay the 
>> data model rather than simply making the statement. All I have seen 
>> so far, and there may have been posts that I have missed, have simply 
>> had that statement and no more.
>
>
> If the RM is supposed to provide some kind of theoretical underpinning 
> for 13250, some people might argue that we can't release the SAM until 
> the RM is finished. As I have noted several times, I personally do not 
> think that the RM is anywhere near prime time. The SAM, on the other 
> hand, is nearing completion. Its editors hope to pretty much finalize 
> it in London. Do we then go to publication with it, or do we keep it 
> on hold while the RM is finished to the committee's satisfaction?
>
> Do you understand the concern now?

Well, at least in part. ;-) I am not sure why the arguments of "some 
people" are of that much concern. I have always assumed that the 
operation of 13250 was not merely happenstance and like the fusion 
reaction in the sun, it works even if the theoretical basis has not been 
made explicit. The question of whether the SAM is ready for publication 
by London is a wholly separable question.


>
>> I appreciate your candor as it sets the stage for at least addressing 
>> this issue and the placement of other parts of the standard, when we 
>> reach London. I will respond if anyone has any substantive points to 
>> advance but prefer to use the time between now and May to help insure 
>> there is a visible answer to Steve's concerns and not a theoretical one.
>
>
> I'm not sure if this is a polite way of saying that you are not 
> interested in engaging in further polemics with me :) To be on the 
> safe side I won't answer your other points unless you ask me to (even 
> though I did find one or two of them very disappointing).

No, actually it was an attempt, ill-fated I see, to keep us exchanging 
real information and opinions and not polemics. If we want to exchange 
polemics, we really should setup a topicmap.rant.rant.alt newsgroup or 
some such. ;-) I enjoy polemic a good bit but don't think it advances 
work on the standard.

>
> In any case, I'm off to Barcelona for a few days!

Enjoy! I have another couple of weeks before I hit the road. Almost a 
month's worth of non-travel which has been fairly novel.

Look forward to a sharpened reply on the points you omitted from this 
post. ;-)

Patrick

>
> Steve
>
> -- 
> Steve Pepper, Chief Executive Officer <pepper@ontopia.net>
> Convenor, ISO/IEC JTC1/SC34/WG3  Editor, XTM (XML Topic Maps)
> Ontopia AS, Waldemar Thranes gt. 98, N-0175 Oslo, Norway.
> http://www.ontopia.net/ phone: +47-23233080 GSM: +47-90827246
>
> _______________________________________________
> sc34wg3 mailing list
> sc34wg3@isotopicmaps.org
> http://www.isotopicmaps.org/mailman/listinfo/sc34wg3


-- 
Patrick Durusau
Director of Research and Development
Society of Biblical Literature
pdurusau@emory.edu
Co-Editor, ISO Reference Model for Topic Maps