[sc34wg3] Feedback on TMCL draft 2009-10-19

[Robert Cerny]

On Jan 4, 2010, at 12:28 PM, Lars Marius Garshol wrote:
> ...
>> 2) http://www.isotopicmaps.org/tmcl/templates.ctm (dated  2009-10-19)
>> I think the name "constrained-statement-type" would be more  
>> appropriate than "constrained-statement". In statements of this  
>> type, the players of the role "constrained" are statement types  
>> and not statements. Same goes for: constrained-role, other- 
>> constrained-role. "constrained-topic-type" sends the right  
>> message, IMHO.
>
> You do have a point here, but the cost is of course that all the  
> PSIs become longer. I created an issue for this:
>   http://projects.topicmapslab.de/issues/1784

I agree that shorter is better, but only if the shorter version has  
the same meaning as the longer one. In this case "statement" will  
direct the reader to the wrong subject. It gets very obvious once you  
browse the topic map.

> ...
>> c) The headline "UNIQUE VALUE CONSTRAINT" does not match the name  
>> of the constraint "unique-occurrence-constraint". If the role- 
>> combination statements are correct, the headline is right and  
>> "unique-value-constraint" would be correct.
>
> Hmmmm. There is no unique-occurrence-constraint, so I'm not sure  
> where you got this from.

Line 204 in http://www.isotopicmaps.org/tmcl/schema.ctm (2009-10-19)

> ...
>> I discovered some errors (syntactical and semantical) in  
>> templates.ctm and schema.ctm. Additionally i must take this  
>> opportunity to speak for the rights of role types. They have the  
>> right to a name! :-)
>> Attached you find an archive containing the original and the  
>> patched versions which i could load into tinyTim.
>
> There were some useful corrections here, which I have incorporated.  
> We really need to get a new draft out soon, because there have been  
> many more changes in schema.ctm since the 2009-10-19 version.

I had to add some more role-combination statements as well in order  
to constrain the range of roles to make selection easier. From the  
form generation point of view, the puropse of constraints is to  
support the user in their effort to fill out forms (make statements,  
communicate). I will send you my latest patched version.

> Thank you very much for this feedback! It's very useful for us.

You are welcome. Thanks to the editors and the committee for putting  
it together. I look very much forward to an approved version with  
ready-to-use namespaces (CTM and TMCL).

Best,

Robert Cerny

Software Development
http://www.cerny-online.com