[sc34wg3] a new name for the Reference Model

[Lars Marius Garshol]

* Sam Hunting
| 
| Of course the standard needs to succeed in the marketplace, but the
| marketplace cycles through change faster than the standards process
| or the standard itself (let alone the names used in the
| marketplace). So if we couple the text and the title of the standard
| too closely to the marketplace, we'll be changing the text and the
| titles constantly, therby undercutting the very perception of
| stability a standard is meant to create. (For example, SGML turned
| out to be a much better term than Office Document Architecture, even
| though "Office Document Architecture" is obviously closely connected
| to a market.) Clear, colorless prose has the advantage of being more
| stable...

Yeah, this is pretty much what I was trying to say.

| Unpronounceable is fine. Heck, I can even do SIDP! 

Due to long training, no doubt. :)
 
| Given that the text of neither the RM or the SAM is stable, I must
| agree with Lars. (What's with this vehemenet agreement thing all of
| a sudden?!?!)

Well, I think we should agree on the names now, but that we need to
discuss it a little more before we can do votes.
 
| As far as I'm concerned, we could table the discussion, use RM and
| SAM for now, and raise the issue again closer to London. Heck, this
| is what general entities are for ;-)

I wouldn't want to do that. In London I hope we can pretty much
rubberstamp the SAM and move on to TMQL and TMCL. That means assigning
a name to the SAM in London would be pretty late. I would very much
prefer to do it now, so that we can finish the thing in London.

-- 
Lars Marius Garshol, Ontopian         <URL: http://www.ontopia.net >
ISO SC34/WG3, OASIS GeoLang TC        <URL: http://www.garshol.priv.no >