Re: [tm-pubsubj-comment] Fwd : On "prohibition" of XTM and URNs

[Lars Marius Garshol <larsga@garshol.priv.no>]

* Lars Marius Garshol
|
| This is straightforward XTM, actually. [...]

* Eric Miller
| 
| To use unattributed id attributes? really?  

Sure. Remember that this is a fixed interchange syntax where you have
to develop your own XTM->topic map builder in any case. It doesn't
matter all that much what the rules are so long as they are clear.
 
| My point was not to focus on this, but rather respond to Murray's
| point about 'try to do that with RDF'.  I regretted even responding
| this much as I was afraid it detracted from the more important
| discussion thread.

No worries. I'm cheerfully ignoring that bit. :)
 
* Lars Marius Garshol
|
| I don't think it's any different from how XSLT uses <xsl:template
| match="..."/>.
 
* Eric Miller
|
| Its not per se, but unattributed attributes in part caused interop
| problems with RDF/XML (hence the decisions not to in the new round
| of specs).  I'm not sure this group will find itself facing similar
| problems, but i expect so.

I don't think so. RDF/XML tries to mix in with other XML, something we
decided we didn't even want to try. That's made life quite simple for
us, and I don't think that particular issue will cause any
difficulties.
   
| Good. I'd like to get a better understanding of the requirements vs
| desires.  I'm afraid I'm still not sure exactly what the
| requirements are for PSI's but the minutes and these discussions are
| helping.

Frankly, we're not entirely sure, either. That's what this process is
all about: working out what's important and how this is most likely to
work in practice. That's also why this group seems a bit aimless from
time to time. We're walking uncharted territory, drawing as we go.

* Lars Marius Garshol
|
| Comments very much welcome on the GeoLang mailing list.

* Eric Miller
|
| I'd prefer to continue this discussion in this group (if this is
| alright by the chair). In short, yes.

The main thing for me is to get feedback. If this is the place where I
get feedback from you I'd rather do that than not get it at all.

| My intention will be to focus comments on PSIs in general while the
| specific examples to ground these comments (now that I've seen them)
| will be more about geolang.  

They are.

| I'm happy for you to forward these to geolang list if you think
| they're useful.

Good. There should be no problem, then.
 
| I would, however, prefer the geolang discussion to take place in the
| public. I find participate in this group rather difficult as half
| seems public, half private and as such it is often difficult to keep
| track of the progress of the group. I'd prefer not to try and track
| this in more than one group.

I can understand that. 

I guess this is basically caused by the group being not very good at
communicating to the world outside the committee, though probably this
group is no worse than most other standards committees. Spreading the
word about what is happening requires a lot of effort, and it is often
difficult to find the time to do that. But you know all that.

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