[sc34wg3] A new idea for the Topic Maps standard

[Lars Marius Garshol]

* Nikita Ogievetsky
| 
| If I do remember well, XTM was started as XML Interchange syntax for Topic
| Maps.
| So this is(!) a normative interchange syntax.

You have to be more precise. What does *mean* when you say "normative
interchange syntax"? That you must support XTM to support topic maps,
or that if you support XTM you must do it as the XTM spec says?

| On the other hand, if XTM syntax is not powerful enough we should
| look into making appropriate changes.

I haven't heard anything about it not being powerful enough. What made
you think it isn't?
 
| Here is how I see RM and SAM positioned:
| The translation from somebody's structured information into
| XTM syntax should be done on the RM level.
| SAM is a RM conformant processing model for XTM.
| (application model with processing rules)
| When people have information expressed in various syntaxes,
| they should first convert it to XTM syntax based on RM,
| then process this information based on SAM.

What's the point of going via the RM? And aren't you contradicting
SRN's proposal for a new conformance section for the RM?
 
Also, we agreed in Berlin to stop using the term "processing model",
as it wasn't clear what it meant. Anything you do with a topic map is
processing, so calling it processing model is really equivalent to
calling it "the model for everything to do with topic maps", which is
not what I think you mean to do.

| Alternatively people can implement their own RM compatible
| processing models and process Topic Maps the way they want.
| But why? - given a set of SAM enabled open source and commercial tools.
| Besides if they do some proprietary staff they will have a hard time
| interchanging with the rest of the world.

Agreed. I think we should be careful not to encourage people to take
this route. As Patrick says there may be special cases where people
want to do it, for example because they don't want to use Unicode, but
we shouldn't encourage them to do so, precisely for the reasons you
mention. 

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