[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: RE: [xri-comment] Comments on the requirements document
Lars Marius, Let me second Gabe's thanks for the feedback. It is very helpful just to remind us that we need a common glossary even at this early point, since we can't agree on requirements with words we differ on the meaning of. The more I understand about Topic Maps the better I see how a glossary can help bridge its world and that of XRIs. I will personally commit to working on this aspect of the requirements document. =Drummond -----Original Message----- From: Wachob, Gabe [mailto:gwachob@visa.com] Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 12:50 PM To: 'Lars Marius Garshol'; xri-comment@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: RE: [xri-comment] Comments on the requirements document Lars Marius- Thanks for your feedback. As noted in the original post, it is just a strawman, so significant holes are to be expected. Your feedback, however, is invaluable as a outside set of eyes. Much appreciated.. -Gabe > -----Original Message----- > From: Lars Marius Garshol [mailto:larsga@garshol.priv.no] > Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 12:37 PM > To: xri-comment@lists.oasis-open.org > Subject: [xri-comment] Comments on the requirements document > > > > Hi everyone, > > I'm one of the people working on topic maps standardization, both the > published subjects work here in OASIS as well as the core standards > work in ISO. > > I've read through the requirements document and also been introduced > to this work on IRC by Gabe Wachob. Gabe was quite helpful, but I have > to say the document itself does not give a very clear picture of what > the TC intends to do. > > The first thing that would be useful would be a clearer list in > section 1 of the deliverables. That is, names (or even numbers) for > the deliverables, and a bit more detail on what is actually going to > be in each. The first is quite clear, but what's in the second? A > protocol? A data model? An interchange format? Anything else? > > In section 2 the definition of "directory" appears to be missing. It > may also be useful to add that "resource" as defined there appears to > be identical to the "resource" of RFC 2396 and the term "subject" in > topic maps. Also, a "version", is that truly a state of the resource > or just a state of the data about it? > > In section 3 it would help a lot of the requirements were reorganized > so that it was clear which requirements applied to which deliverable. > Also, in 3.1 points 2-4 are very vague. I can't really make out what > they are saying. Number 9 seems to imply that there will be a data > model, but nothing has been said about any such model earlier. To see > a list of the technologies the TC intends to create would make > evaluating these requirements much easier. > > In section 3.2, point number 2 seems to say that it should be possible > to encapsulate URIs from other URI schemes within XRI URIs, almost > like with the tdb: URIs proposed by Larry Masinter. Is that really > what it is saying? If so, why? > > Point 4 (of 3.2) talks about a "root", but I have no idea what that > means. > > Points 6-7 (of 3.2) seem internally contradictory. Is there going to > be a single XRI URI scheme, or multiple ones? > > Point 8 (of 3.2) talks about "parent resources", but what they are is > not clear. Is the XRI data model hierarchical? How does that fit with > attributes? And are attribute types themselves resources, BTW? > > At the end of section 3.2 there is also talk of an XRID namespace. > What is that? Does it have any relation to the URI scheme(s)? > > In section 3.3, point 3, should it say "use" rather than "support"? > One missing requirement in this section seems to be an interchange > format for the data model one presumes is going to be part of this. > > In section 3.5, point 2, there is talk of "completely decentralized > resolution". What is that? > > In section 3.6, point 2, it is said that the specifications must be > language-independent. What does "language" mean in this context? > Surely not natural language? > > > Lots of questions, and rather less advice. I hope it is useful even > so. > > -- > Lars Marius Garshol, Ontopian <URL: http://www.ontopia.net > > GSM: +47 98 21 55 50 <URL: > http://www.garshol.priv.no > >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC