[sc34wg3] TMCL-WG Summary of Contributions

[Martin Bryan]

Mary

Thanks for circulating the first draft. Some comments for you to consider:

>   c) The expression language used in TMCL shall be TMQL, or a suitable
>      subset thereof.

Firstly, DSDL will have a constraint language, probably based on Schematron.
The requirements statement for TMCL should not rule out the use of this
language for expressing topic map constraints. Secondly, your statement
implies that TMQL will include means of expressing constraints, which is
clearly not the case. TMQL will only be suitable for identifying the set of
topic map components to which a constraint will apply. In other words it
will provide the XPath equivalent for RDF's about statement. The above
option should read:

c) The expression language used in TMCL should re-use relevant parts of TMQL
to identify which topic map components a set of constraints applies to.

You then go on to say:

> It may also  include but is not limited to the following.
>
> Definitions of Classes and relationships of Classes and Instances:
> Explicily indicate topics as classes
> Describe relationships as classes

Both the above statements are ambiguous. What I think you mean are:

Explicitly identify topics conforming to a specific constraint as belonging
to a particular class of topics
Explicitly identify assocaitions conforming to a specific constraint as
belonging to a particular class of associations

If I am right you should use these mroe explicit statements

Martin Bryan
IS-Thought: Thinkers for the Information Society
29 Oldbury Orchard, Churchdown, Glos. GL3 2PU, UK
Phone/Fax: 01452 714029 E-mail: martin@is-thought.co.uk

Thought of the week:
Is "being" necessary? Won't "known as" suffice?