[sc34wg3] A new idea for the Topic Maps standard

[Lars Marius Garshol]

* Patrick Durusau
|
| Not sure what Nikita mean or you agree to about "a hard time
| interchanging with the rest of the world."
| 
| We have two interchange syntaxes so no matter what processing model
| I use, so long as it complies with the requirements of the RM and I
| export to an interchange syntax, how am I failing on the interchange
| part?

As far as the interchange syntax goes you would not fail. You can
successfully implement XTM and HyTM with just about any internal
model. I was thinking more of things like TMAPI, TMCL, and TMQL, if
these are specified in terms of the SAM, but admittedly you could also
implement these on top of the RM.

What you *would* find difficult to interchange is anything you express
in the RM that goes beyond the features the SAM has. And even that is
not really true, since you could always represent the same things
using the constructs already in the SAM.

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