RE: [xtm-wg] Simplification and clarification of XTM - Editors please read...

["Graham Moore" <gdm@empolis.co.uk>]

general point..

I have attached the revised DTD with examples in a comment at the end that
further clarify and exemplify my comments.

a few thoughts and suggestions...

I see the way in which subject has been done in the syntax as very clunky
and does not use the machinery of the model (i.e. resources as topics).
Given that all resources are topics in the topic map. Something we agreed
but has not been made clear in the spec, enables us to very cleanly
represent the different aspects of subject.

The clarification for topics as resources is :

'if a topic has a resource ref and another topic has the same resource ref
they are the same topic and should be merged.'

The resource ref is an optional element on a topic and if present indicates
that the topic is a resourcetopic.

On the issue of merging, the example below says the two topics are the same
as they have the same identity. Issue: should two topics really be merged if
one references the other as its subject. This would imply that a topic
serves as ones of its own subjdesc. Which I think is a contradiction to the
idea of topics being proxies to intangible subjects. i.e. the topic is a
topic to 'the topic as a resource' and the proxied subject. A topic can only
have one subject.

These should be merged...

<topic ID="Graham">
	<name>
		gdm
	</name>

	<subjectIdentity>
		<topicref href="#rt-1234">
	</subjectIdentity>
</topic>

<topic ID="Graham">
	<name>
		Graham Moore
	</name>

	<subjectIdentity>
		<topicref href="#rt-1234">
	</subjectIdentity>
</topic>

These should not?

<topic id="graham">
	<subjectIdentity>
		<topicref href="#gdm">
	</subjectIdentity>
</topic>

<topic id="gdm">
...
</topic>

With this clarification the syntax in the DTD is much simpler, no less
expressive and re-iterates the idea that resources are topics. Which I
assumed would have to be made clear when we did occurrences.

On occurrences it should be made clear that the href of the occur element
actually is a shorthand for creating a topic that is a proxy for a resource.

The change to allow a resourceref directly on a topic enables us to create
topics for resources without having to create occurrences.


If associations are subclasses of topics then we should have exacttly the
same structure. I.e. names, identity and occurrences. If we have class with
properties and a subclass of this class then they derive the properties. If
you serialise this thing then you serialise the derived and super class
properties. What we cannot have in the spec is contradication...

there is a section that talks about the 'properties' of a topic association
and says that a assoc is a subclass of topic. We cannot say one thing here
and not have a syntax that reflects this.

If someone can better explain this, (a topicassoc with names as occurs split
into two completely urelated strcutures even though they are the *SAME*
thing!!!!

<topic id="t-34">
	<basename>
		<bnstr>Graham Works For Empolis</bnstr>
	</basename>
	<occur href="jsjfjgjjgjj" />
</topic>

<assoc id="t-45">
	<role />
	<role />
</assoc>

<!-- i'm not even sure how to relate them! -->

as being clearer than the following

<topic id="t-34">
	<basename>
		<bnstr>Graham Works For Empolis</bnstr>
	</basename>
	<occur href="jsjfjgjjgjj" />
	<role />
	<role />
</topic>

then I would concede that we dont need to make changes. However I think we
need to make changes.


Clarification:

I would like to see syntax examples of the template ideas as in the current
document. In the DTD I have supplied there are template examples that work
with a prototyping model. I have clarifed the use of member roles.

Was it the intention of the spec to tell people what properties actual
'object nodes', or 'nodes' should have. Or is this implementation detail?

I am working my way through the spec and i'm sure there will be some more
questions.

cheers

graham

Graham Moore
gdm@empolis.co.uk
Empolis
http://www.empolis.com
VP Research & Development












________________________________________________________________________
This message has been checked for all known viruses, by Star Internet, 
delivered through the MessageLabs Virus Control Centre. 
For further information visit:
http://www.star.net.uk/stats.asp

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/0/_/337252/_/975490173/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

To Post a message, send it to:   xtm-wg@eGroups.com

To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: xtm-wg-unsubscribe@eGroups.com

xtm1d.dtd