[sc34wg3] For or Against N323! [Was:Topic Maps land and SAM land]

[Mary Nishikawa]

*LMG
> > The two models are different. Either you implement the SAM model, or
> > you implement the RM model.

*SH
>There's that "either/or" thing again.
>
>Either it is not "either/or" but "both/and", or I am wrong. If I am wrong,
>it should be easy  to show that I am, by citing the text of the RM that
>proves that.

*LMG
> > If the OKS is an RM tool, then Excel, Notepad, and Apache are also RM
> > tools.

*Sam Hunting
>Well, supposing that all of these tools generated data that contained
>inherent topic map information, and supposing that they could be specified
>as such using the RM, would that be such a bad thing? "Embrace and
>extend" sounds like a pretty good idea to me ;-)

I didn't realize that the RM was thought of as this metaphysical. I can 
understand better now the disagreement and I think that this can go on 
forever if we let it.

This really all began with Steve's request for a Let's revert to N323!  So 
Sam, do you agree with continuing with N323 for the roadmap?

I would really like to know from each and every person on WG3 what their 
"vote" is on this. A simple answer to this mail "For" or "Against" would 
suffice. Thanks.

Cheers,
Mary