[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: [tm-pubsubj] Re: Country.xtm PSI; also proposed region.xtm PSI
Bernard Vatant wrote: > > Murray > > I am as uneasy with your proposition as I was with the one concerning the > republication of XTM 1.0 a few months ago. > This is definitely not in the charter of PubSubj TC as is. Maybe it could be > thought as a subcommittee? Of PubSubj TC? No, I'd recommend then it simply be its own thing, since this that would create a two-level umbrella under the Topic Maps TC, and I'd rather have the "Topic Map I18n TC" (for lack of a better term) report to them rather than to us. > But the "Big Picture" about published subjects we discussed in Montréal was to > have PubSubj TC for general recommendations, and various specific TCs for field > applications of those recommendations, bringing insight from field experts and > users in well defined areas. This seems quite bureaucratic, I acknowledge, but > it is a way both to keep each working group into focus, and bring interest in > the process from field experts outside the "core" topic maps community. No, I don't think that's too bureaucratic. I think you're correct, the more I think about it. > In this very case, I suppose - I've no specific knowledge in that field - there > is a published legacy of countries, regions and languages terminology maintained > by various authorities (ISO and others), and I would imagine a good idea would > be to explore with those very authorities how this legacy can be used as > published subjects, how it can fit into PubSubj TC recommendations with the less > rewriting effort, etc. It's both of marketing and technical interest to bring > the existing legacy of taxonomies and classifications in the field of published > subjects. Very much agreed. This would entail the "Topic Map I18n TC" have liaison relations with ISO, ANSI, MARC records office, the UN, or whatever other organizations' code bases it hopes to represent. I'd made those contacts with ISO, MARC, and the UN regarding this, but I think it'd be much more appropriate, official, and ongoing to have an OASIS TC (with subject matter experts, as you say) really tackle this correctly. I don't think this is something to quickly sweep under the "done" carpet, as these code bases are all changing at varying speeds and it's probably a good idea to actually sit down and figure out *how* this is best managed. Sorry to swing around my opinion, but I agree with you Bernard. It's in the best interests of all involved that our TC concentrate on getting a spec and best practices document out into the public domain and having a committee composed of appropriate experts with appropriate responsibility approach this more methodically. I would certainly be willing to hand off all my existing work to such a committee, and would be willing to sit in (if necessary) as an "XTM expert", though I'm not likely to have a travel budget for such things while in school. Murray ........................................................................... Murray Altheim <mailto:murray.altheim@sun.com> XML Technology Center, Java and XML Software Sun Microsystems, Inc., MS MPK17-102, 1601 Willow Rd., Menlo Park, CA 94025 Corporations do not have human rights, despite the altogether too-human opinions of the US Supreme Court.
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC