[sc34wg3] Topic Maps land and SAM land

[Lars Marius Garshol]

* Jan Algermissen
| 
| [how many RM assertions per RDF statement]
|
| The answer is that it depends on the TM Model (RM: application).
| More precisely it depends on the way how a certain model 'decides'
| to interprete a certain syntax. 

This was what I thought, and I didn't really see how it could be any
other way.

| In the case of RDF it does not only depend on the syntax but also on
| the semantics of the used namespaces but that is another issue.

Now I'm curious. How does the semantics of the RDF statements affect
how they must be modelled?
 
| The structure of an assertion is explained in the RM prose. The mapping
| from a given syntax to corresponding assertions is entirely part of the
| definition of a TM model. 

Right. So you *could* create a model where every RDF statement maps to
a single RM assertion?

| So, a SAM defined in RM terms would include a processing model for
| XTM, saying how all the element's are to be interpreted. 

Why would it? SAM doesn't have XTM elements in it, so why would an RM
model of the SAM have them?

| Yes, see above. The author(s) of a syntax processing model of a TM
| Model make that choice.

Now I'm surprised again: why do you say "a syntax processing model of
a TM"? Where does syntax enter the picture?

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