[sc34wg3] a new name for the Reference Model

[Michel Biezunski]

> * Michel Biezunski
> | 
> | As for the name of SAM, I think that Steve's suggestion to call it
> | the "Standard Model" is quite appealing. 

[Lars:]

> In that case, why not just drop "Standard". We know it's a standard,
> so we don't need that in the name. "Topic Map Model" is simple and
> straightforward, or we could follow the XML route and call it "Topic
> Map Information Set" (a la "XML Information Set").

I see your point, it's a good point. 

I don't think "Topic Map Information Set" is
appropriate (too much XML: see why in another message).
The only problem with "Topic Map Model", which I like
is that it tends to deny the possibility of creating
other Topic Maps-based models.
(See my comment on Names as an example where this could
be useful). I believe we should further explore exactly
what we mean by a topic map model which would not be
the standard one, try to find concrete examples,
then the name will come naturally. Anybody who can
help trying to figure that out, please do.

I also agree with Steve P. that using the word "models"
to describe the 2 levels might be another factor of
confusion. But I am not yet convinced we have the
solution now.

Michel
===================================
Michel Biezunski
Coolheads Consulting
402 85th Street #5C
Brooklyn, New York 11209
Email:mb@coolheads.com
Web  :http://www.coolheads.com
Voice: (718) 921-0901
==================================