RE: [xtm-wg] An XTM test suite

["Chris Angus" <chris.angus@btinternet.com>]

Well said both.

Chris Angus
KALIDO Product Architect
Tel: +44 16 9774 1504 / +44 20 7934 4960
chris.angus@btinternet.com / chris.angus@kalido.com
www.kalido.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Steven R. Newcomb [mailto:srn@coolheads.com]
Sent: 17 February 2001 01:07
To: xtm-wg@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [xtm-wg] An XTM test suite


[Graham Moore:]
> To avoid the problems of implementation specifics or
> one mechanism over another I would further suggest
> that we encode our model using a number of
> representations:

> 1. Grove Definition
> 	Nodes and Properties
> 
> 2. Entity Relationship Diagram
> 	Entities with properties and relationships
> 
> 3. RDF triples
> 	subject, propname, object
> 
> 4. Mathematically formal
> 	N E Name = {N1, N2, ...} 		(Object Name)
> 	O E Object = {O1, O2, ... } 		(Object)
> 	ROW E Env = Name ->(func) Object 	(Naming Function)
> 	T E Topic = {N1, N2, ...}		(Topic)

I like this idea for several reasons, and not just
because we must avoid blessing some particular
implementation:

(1) It's simply the truth that there are multiple ways
    to model already-processed topic map information,
    and XTM should stress and demonstrate that fact.

(2) Models are models, and reality is reality.  For the
    sake of global knowledge interchange, there should
    be only one reality of topic map information.
    We'll all know it when we see it, but we're still
    groping to define it.  Multiple models will give
    multiple perspectives on reality, and, thus,
    reality will be better understood and better
    revealed.  Also, I wonder whether everything
    important can be revealed if we limit ourselves to
    a single modeling paradigm.

(3) Modeling paradigms represent keys to mindshare and
    marketplace.  Individuals only understand certain
    modeling paradigms (modeling languages, graphic
    visual vocabularies, etc.).  If we use any one
    single modeling paradigm, we'll de facto exclude
    those who would have understood topic maps if we
    had used another modeling paradigm.

But the idea of developing multiple models worries me,
too:

(1) Multiple standard models offer huge opportunities
    for conflicts between them, which will be very bad
    for global knowledge interchange.  One or more
    supergeniuses, fluent in all of the modeling
    paradigms, will have to keep it all in their heads,
    and we will all have to trust them to discover and
    resolve all the conflicts and holes.  I know we
    have several such supergeniuses in the XTM AG, but
    this will be a burdensome role, even for them.

(2) Who has time to achieve such an ambitious program
    of work within a reasonable (i.e. awfully short)
    amount of time?  Do we have to publish all of the
    models at the same time, or can each be published
    when it's ready?  Etc.

I think we're going to have to make some tough
decisions about how to proceed.  We must develop
consensus on this, because the investment of effort, no
matter how we decide to go forward, will be
significant, and the impact of the ultimate design on
topic map technologies and business models will also be
significant.  This deserves careful thought by
everyone.

We agreed, when we formed XTM, that XTM's decisions
would be guided by the principle of maximizing public
benefit.  And they have been.  To those who say, "Yeah,
but the vendors have taken over XTM," I say this:

  Watch and learn.  Know us by our products.  We're not
  just a clearinghouse for economic interests.  We're
  thoughtful *individuals* who take our
  responsibilities and opportunities very seriously
  indeed.  We may be slogging through a quagmire of
  conflicting economic interests, but we know what
  we're trying to accomplish, and, one way or another,
  we're accomplishing it.

  Also, you might think about joining us (but, please,
  only if you have something to contribute!).

-Steve

--
Steven R. Newcomb, Consultant
srn@coolheads.com

voice: +1 972 359 8160
fax:   +1 972 359 0270

405 Flagler Court
Allen, Texas 75013-2821 USA


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

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



------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-~>
eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups
Click here for more details
http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/337252/_/982426494/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

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

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