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] Subject Indicator and Subject Indicator Reference(again)


Lars Marius

Your viewpoint is consistent.

Others?

Bernard


----- Message d'origine -----
De : "Lars Marius Garshol" <larsga@garshol.priv.no>
À : "tm-pubsubj" <tm-pubsubj@lists.oasis-open.org>; "Steve Newcomb" <srn@coolheads.com>;
"Michel Biezunski" <mb@infoloom.com>
Envoyé : mercredi 23 janvier 2002 12:59
Objet : Re: [tm-pubsubj] Subject Indicator and Subject Indicator Reference (again)


>
> * Bernard Vatant
> |
> | 1. What is the "subject indicator reference" ?
>
> I'd say 1.b), that is, the URI. (This is what your proposed definition
> in the REC says.)
>
> | 2. What is the "subject indicator" ?
>
> It's the resource (in this case, document) referred to by the URI.
> That is, 2.b).
>
> | -- But I'm afraid what we have put in the RecommendationsGlossary is
> | more like 1.b) and 2.b)
>
> It is.
>
> | -- And ISO 13250 seems to say 2.b) also for subject indicator (or is
> | it clear about it?)
>
> It doesn't use the term. It talks about subject descriptors and how
> the 'identity' attribute refers to them.
>
> | -- My view is that sticking to 2.a) "subject indicator" = "subject
> | identifier" = "the URI" is the more sustainable and explainable.
>
> That's quite simply wrong. If you have a topic map that uses a subject
> indicator it's quite clear that it contains a reference to something
> that indicates the subject. It's also quite clear that the reference
> is the URI, while the thing that actually does the indication is the
> resource. Now, what is the most useful is actually the subject
> indicator reference, but that doesn't affect the terminology.
>
> The URI is clearly a kind of subject identifier, but I think we should
> steer clear of that term, since we don't need it, and SIR is easier to
> understand.
>
> The xlink:href is what asserts the reference, by the way. It is *not*
> the reference. This is the difference between addressing and linking.
> The xlink:ref is the link, the URI the address.
>
> Would it help if I sat down and wrote up an explanation of this as I
> see it, which you can then either shoot down or adopt? (Would solve
> the "what do we put in instead of the glossary" problem at the same
> time. :-)
>
> | In that case we have no name for 2.b) in the case the resource is
> | not a declared Subject Definition Resource (the quoted example). But
> | do we need a name in that (non recommended) case?
>
> We have all the terms we need already. We just need to be clear on
> what they mean. :-)
>
> --Lars M.
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
>



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


Powered by eList eXpress LLC