OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

tm-pubsubj message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]


Subject: Re: [tm-pubsubj] Re: TC Website reorganization, and drafts update


Mary Nishikawa wrote:
[...] 
> Mary:
> How about this, or maybe it is too verbose perhaps?
> "A published subject is any subject for which at least one stable subject
> definition document or  addressable resource has been made available for
> public use
> by the publisher identified within the published subject documentation."
> 
> We may want to call it published subject documentation package as Lars
> Marius suggests.

I think the text in the XTM 1.0 specification was pretty close. From 2.3.1:

   "A published subject indicator is therefore any resource that has 
    been published in order to provide a positive, unambiguous 
    indication of the identity of a subject for the purpose of 
    facilitating topic map interchange and mergeability."

To be frank (or Frank) I really haven't seen an improvement on that one.
 
[...]
> Murray:
> >I'd started to reply to Bernard regarding having one type of PSI
> >documentation or definition and ran out of time. I'm doing so again
> >right now.
> >
> >Suffice it to say that the sources of definitions for PSIs are not
> >always going to be put into a specialized XML markup language, and
> >I think it's a mistake to require that. [...]
> Mary:
> I agree with you completely here and  have expressed  a similar sentiment
> to Bernard.
> 
> For example, if Schlumberger were to implement topic maps, I do not think
> that we would go through the trouble and expense to create specialized xml
> documents to provide addressable resources for the same reasons you pointed
> out. There are generic PSIs that we would use though.

I'm not opposed to such an idea if there weren't other avenues, but since
we're really web-based (in terms of general audience and experience), I'd 
suggest something along the lines of specific XHTML markup, if we were to
make any recommendation. This would enable both human- and machine-readable
resources, using commonly available tools like a web browser.

> Murray, what I understood from the Orlando meeting was,  html resources
> containing fragment identifiers for subjects could also be used as an SDD.
> The requirements can also encourage the use of additional metadata  within
> the html file or an html or xml metadata file linked to that resource or
> visa versa. The SDD could also be used as a standalone resource for
> defining subjects. Is my understanding correct?

Yes, exacta-mundo. That was the whole point of 

    http://www.doctypes.org/meta/NOTE-xhtml-augmeta.html

> I would guess that the most common general use case would be PSI sets
> created with one or more SDD documents in html with fragment identifiers
> for each subject in the resource. So I think that I agree with you here.
> I think that another interesting use case is how subjects in html, xhtml,
> or xml files are "annotated"  in W3C's Annotea. I wondered how this would
> fit in with our recommendations.

For an example, you can check out my proposal on Cyc, I published a spec 
describing Cyc-in-XTM, provided topic maps, and provided an XHTML document
with the fragment identifiers. 

   http://www.doctypes.org/cyc/cyc-xtm-20010227.html
   http://www.doctypes.org/cyc/constants.html 

The first is the URL of the spec, the second the XHTML document listing
the PSIs, with links back into the Cyc web-based documentation.

> We do need a thorough interchange to get the recommendations done. Please
> stay in the loop.

Well, my heart's in the right place, but my life is going to get pretty
hectic over the next month or so as I begin the move to sunny England.

Murray

...........................................................................
Murray Altheim                         <mailto:murray.altheim&#x40;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