[xtm-wg] A challenge on ... PSI

["Bernard Vatant" <universimmedia@wanadoo.fr>]

Since challenges are in the spring air, and since the graph war seems to
calm down a little, giving back a little bandwidth to this list, I propose
to open another battlefield ...

Below are some open questions about PSI. I've pushed some bits of reflection
and questioning about it here and there, but would like some general
feedback before putting together more formal propositions about it. On
several of them, I've quite defined ideas as you can imagine, but let the
questions open for the moment. Here goes a first salvo to declare the war
:o) ... more to come I'm afraid !

1. The notion of PSI is defined in the spec only in an informal way, and I
would say in an external way: In short, a PSI is an URI you can refer as an
indicator of the subject identity. Nowhere is written in a formal way what
are the requirements - if any - about what should/must show at this URI to
make it suitable for that use. I've already suggested that it has be
clarified, for example:

- Is a PSI anything else that a neutral binding point, with no much more
content than an address?
- If a PSI has a content, has it to be somehow Topic Map - like?
- Has a PSI content to be XTM conformant to be used in a XTM document?
- Have PSI to be scoped? from the inside (editor-side)? from the outside
(user-side)?
....

2. The mandatory PSI in XTM 1.0 - independently of the controversial list of
those who should or should not appear there, which is another pending
question - are published under an "implicitly standardized" syntax. Is that
syntax intended to become an explicit model for future extension of this PSI
list? Is that syntax a suggestion or recommendation for other PSI editors,
wishing to edit PSI repositories inside or outside the namespace
topicmaps.org? See for example what's going on at http://psi.seruba.com/ or
what Murray is working on about XTM and Cyc at
http://www.doctypes.org/cyc/cyc-xtm-20010227.html, which I supposed is
intended to be used as PSI repository ...

3. Is PSI a "pure XTM" concept, or could it be extended further into the
"semantopic" universe? Have RDF, Dublin Core, PRISM, ebXML, NewsML, ISO
standards, W3C recommendations etc ... something to do with/for/about PSI?
Are there standardization approaches that look like PSI under other names,
etc ...

4. Should topicmaps.org maintain some (un)official index of PSI
repositories, or declare to be the (authoritative) source where PSI
certification has to be found? Should that be normative or informative :o) ?

Well - think it's enough to begin with ... I've opened a 1 Go hard-drive
space for your answers, hope it will do :)

Cheers


Bernard Vatant
www.universimmedia.com


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-~>
Secure your servers with 128-bit SSL encryption!
Grab your copy of VeriSign's FREE Guide,
"Securing Your Web site for Business." Get it now!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/KVNB7A/e.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/