Re: [tm-pubsubj-comment] ISSUE 1 and ISSUE X

[Bernard Vatant <bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>]

*Lars Marius

> Comments on the SAM draft has now raised two issues:
>
>   psi-identification
>
>     How does one identify which topics represent published subjects,
>     and which ones do not?

What is the purpose of this distinction?
Do you think this is a necessary distinction in any topic map, or is it specific to SAM ?

>   psi-set-psi
>
>     How does one create a topic representing the set of all published
>     subjects defined as part of SAM in such a way that it can be
>     reliably merged?

I don't understand why this is an issue. We need a PSI for this set, but in what is it a
specific issue?

> Both of these seem related to ISSUE 1, but ISSUE 1 is phrased in a way
> that is very unclear, and so it is not clear to me which of these
> ISSUE 1 actually represents. Either way, it seems that the issues
> document needs to be extended with one more issue, and that ISSUE 1
> needs to be phrased more clearly. Preferably, ISSUE 1 should be stated
> as a question, with no suggestion of how it might be resolved.

Yes. I know I *have* to review the issues document altogether. Hope to make it between
today and tomorrow ...

> It would be useful if this could be resolved this week, so that the
> Barcelona meeting of WG3 would know what SAM issues correspond to what
> PubSubj issues.

OK. I'll do my best ...

Bernard