Re: [tm-pubsubj-comment] ISSUE 1 - PS Doc Identification andauto-referencing

[Mary Nishikawa <nisikawa@fuchinobe.oilfield.slb.com>]

>*Lars Marius
>
>I think this is confusing. I would analyze the problem differently:
>  - the PS Doc Set is a subject,
>  - therefore we can create a topic that represents it,
>  - the PS Doc Set will live at a well-defined URI
>  - therefore we can address it formally with either a subject address
>    or a subject identifier (it doesn't matter which just yet),
>  - every PS Doc set will be an instance of the class 'PS Doc set',
>  - as we can have a topic for the doc set, we can also formally
>    declare that the topic is an instance of the 'PS Doc set' class

I am really groping with this. I really think that more of us need to try 
out how some of this fits to get a feel for it. I will post some of my xtm 
code and comment on it. I am not saying that this is what I think should 
be, it is only an attempt in trying to understand what a publisher of 
subjects might need.
I am also commenting on how to handle metadata here. It is really hard to 
post here and there and this is all related, I think.

I find that I need a class called PS Doc Set (psi-set). For example:

<topicMap id="unspsc-71">

</snip>
<!-- This is my topic for the doc set. -->
<topic id="unspsc-71-psi-set">

<!--I need a  a class for psi-set with other classes that we will need for 
pubished subjects. These will be found in pubsub.xtm (possible name) and 
would live with the standard somewhere http://www.topicmaps.org/xtm/1.0/ ?.-->

<instanceOf>
                         <topicRef 
xlink:href="http://www.topicmaps.org/xtm/1.0/pubsubj.xtm#psi-set"/>
</instanceOf>
<!-- The identity of my set is the ID of the TM itself. This concept 
corresponds to what Steve proposed -->
<!--This unspsc-71-psi-set corresponds to the" topicmap" topic used in 
the  PUBLISHED SUBJECT DOCUMENTATION SET METADATA  section in 
http://psi.ontopia.net/ontopia/ontopia.xtm. The unspsc-71.xtm subject 
indicators become "Published Subjects Indicators" with this 
specially-defined topic which reifies the unspsc-core topic map. The 
occurrence of this topic is the metadata. -->
                 <subjectIdentity>
                         <resourceRef xlink:href="#unspsc-71"/>
                 </subjectIdentity>
                 <baseName>
                         <scope>
                                 <topicRef xlink:href="#UNSPSC"/>
                                 <subjectIndicatorRef 
xlink:href="http://www.topicmaps.org/xtm/1.0/language.xtm#en"/>
                         </scope>
                         <baseNameString>Segment 71 UNSPSC Published 
Subject Indicators</baseNameString>
                 </baseName>

                 <occurrence>
                         <resourceRef 
xlink:href="http://purl.org/mnishikawa/unspsc-71-metadata.rdf"/>
                 </occurrence>

         </topic>

         <!-- A group of subject indicators can  become "published subject 
indicators" by appending this topic XXX-psi-set which advertised that this 
is  a psi-set and has metadata in an external resource which is an 
occurrence of this topic. In this example I use Simple Dublin Core Metadata 
Elements  V1.1 (DCMES) in rdf. Other forms of metadata can be used. -->

This metadata could also be like this in the header of this html file 
http://purl.org/mnishikawa/unspsc-71.htm (see mail to Suellen):

Instead of using the RDF example for the metadata, we can use this instead? 
The value of  this is that we would have the indicators  in the html file, 
too. They are not included in the rdf metadata file. Some would want to use 
only xtm. I think that all of these examples would help others decide which 
is best for them to implement. There are many user communities.

                 <occurrence>
                         <resourceRef 
xlink:href="http://purl.org/mnishikawa/unspsc-71.htm"/>
                 </occurrence>

<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<meta http-equiv="Title" content="Public ECCMA codes of the January 01, 
2002 release of UNSPSC Segment 71
Published Subject Indicators in html">

<!--forces a reloading of a new version for each visit -->
<meta http-equiv="expires" CONTENT="Wed, 26 Feb 1997 08:21:57 GMT">

<meta   name="DC.Source"
                 content="http://www.eccma.org/unspsc/browse/71.html";>
<meta   name="DC.Creator.Source"
                 content="http://www.eccma.org";>
<meta   name="DC.Publisher.Source"
                 content="http://www.eccma.org";>
<meta   name="DC.Date"
                 content="2002-01-01">
<meta   name="DC.Language"
                 scheme="rfc1766"
                 content="en-US">
<meta   name="DC.Title.PSI"
                 content="Published Subject Indicators of the Public 
January 01,2002 Release of UNSPSC Segement 71">
<meta   name="DC.Creator.PSI"
                 content="Nishikawa, Mary">
<meta   name="DC.Publisher.PSI"
                 content="Nishikawa, Mary">
<meta   name="DC.Identifier"
                 content="http://purl.org/mnishikawa/unspsc-71.htm";>
<meta   name="DC.Relation.IsPartOf"
                 content="http://purl.org/mnishikawa/unspsc-71.xtm";>

<meta   name="Keywords"
                 content="UNSPSC; Segment 71; ECCMA; Published Subjects; 
OASIS; XTM; Topic Maps; EGCI; EGCC; tm-pubsubj; pubsubj">

I think that DC.identifier was intended for one resource. We could add psi, 
as Suellen suggested.

<meta   name="DC.Identifier"
                         content="http://purl.org/mnishikawa/unspsc-71.htm";
                         psi="http://purl.org/mnishikawa/unspsc-71.html#009026";
                         psi="http://purl.org/mnishikawa/unspsc-71.html#009253";
                         psi="http://purl.org/mnishikawa/unspsc-71.html#013392";
                         psi="http://purl.org/mnishikawa/unspsc-71.html#013401";
 >