RE: [xtm-wg] A challenge on "the graph"

[Sam Hunting <sam_hunting@yahoo.com>]

Jean--

I ask you to reconsider:

(1) The last thing the XTM community needs is Mondeca going its own
way. How can this help interoperability or the growth of the market for
topic maps?

(2) I issued the challenge to get the debate going! Lars does not agree
with the graph concept -- that is his right -- but to come to consensus
this is the sort of debate we must have.

S.


--- jean delahousse <jean.delahousse@mondeca.com> wrote:
> Dear all
> 
> I feel a very low support for building a semantic graph vocabulary
> based on
> graph theory to describe different semantic web specifications and
> try to
> get general processing models that will be useful to navigate, query
> and
> process large XML semantic networks made of XTM, XML document, RDF
> document
> all linked together (as it will happen)
> 
> Mondeca will go at its own pace doing this work and when we'll have
> something to share will do. If anyone wants to participate to that
> work we
> will be happy to work together.
> 
> I hope you'll attend those two presentations during XML2001 in Berlin
> 
> http://www.gca.org/attend/2001_conferences/europe_2001/topicmaps.htm
> 
> sincerely
> 
> jean
> 
> 
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Lars Marius Garshol [mailto:larsga@garshol.priv.no]
> Envoye : mer. 21 mars 2001 21:54
> A : xtm-wg@yahoogroups.com
> Objet : Re: [xtm-wg] A challenge on "the graph"
> 
> 
> 
> * Sam Hunting
> |
> | I have had the concerns expressed to me regarding "the graph" (what
> | some of us have been calling the processing model) is not The Right
> | Thing and may be The Wrong Thing. Better to resolve this issue now,
> | rather than later, eh?
> 
> I certainly agree! Later may in fact turn out to be too late, so the
> sooner this is decided the better.
> 
> | "the graph" has been fully (if verbosely) expressed in the AG
> Review
> | Draft of 2000-12-04, released in DC.
> 
> | It seems reasonable to me, that the best way to show that "the
> graph"
> | is the wrong thing, would be to go to the www.topicmaps.org,
> download
> | the AG Review Draft, study it, and give feedback on it.
> 
> My concerns with the graph formalism are mainly these:
> 
>  - it is far removed from the actual form of implementations, making
>    it much harder to understand for implementors, which are after all
>    the intended audience
> 
>  - it is insufficiently detailed in that some properties of the nodes
>    in the graph are left out, even properties of great importance to
>    processing
> 
>  - the form the graph is specified in (property-less nodes connected
>    by arcs with endpoints of two types) causes the description to
>    become difficult to follow, since everything is so type-less and
> so
>    very similar everywhere
> 
> However, I think complaining about these things is far less effective
> than showing what I mean by actually presenting an alternative that
> uses the kind of formalism I would prefer. I think that would make it
> far easier for people to decide what they think is the better
> formalism.
> 
> I will present a sketch of such a processing model in my next
> posting.
> 
> | If there is anything I can do to assist this process, please let me
> | know.
> 
> I think you have done what you possibly can for now.
> 
> | P.S. I heard a rumor to the effect that one vendor had done a
> | detailed review of the AG Review Draft, but held back out of a
> sense
> | of tact.
> 
> This vendor is not Ontopia. It may be some other vendor, but if so I
> know nothing whatever of it.
> 
> --Lars M.
> 
> 
> 
> To Post a message, send it to:   xtm-wg@eGroups.com
> 
> To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
> xtm-wg-unsubscribe@eGroups.com
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> 
> To Post a message, send it to:   xtm-wg@eGroups.com
> 
> To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
> xtm-wg-unsubscribe@eGroups.com 
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
> 
> 


=====
<!-- "To imagine a language is to imagine a form of life."
     - Ludwig Wittgenstein, Philosophical Investigations -->

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. 
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-~>
Do you have 128-bit SSL encryption server security?
Get VeriSign's FREE Guide, "Securing Your
Web Site for Business." Get it now!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/2cW4jC/c.WCAA/bT0EAA/2n6YlB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

To Post a message, send it to:   xtm-wg@eGroups.com

To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: xtm-wg-unsubscribe@eGroups.com 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/