Re: [xtm-wg] A challenge on "the graph"

[Murray Altheim <altheim@eng.sun.com>]

Lars Marius Garshol wrote:
> 
> * Murray Altheim
> |
> | I'm looking for a model that is in some way comprehensible and
> | useful as a model for those who attempt to write applications that
> | process topic maps. If it doesn't do that, it's an academic
> | exercise.
> 
> * Sam Hunting
> |
> | "So?" These two positions are othogonal.
> |
> | Describing the PM in a clear way is an editorial problem that is
> | certainly soluble. It is not a technical problem.
> 
> I think what Murray is trying to say is the graph-based model is
> inherently more difficult to comprehend and make use of for those who
> are to implement topic maps.

I wouldn't go so far as to say that a graph is inherently more difficult
to comprehend; I remain to be convinced in either direction. What I'm
hoping to see is that an existing graph formalism can be used to describe
the topic maps data model. Contrary to Steve Newcomb's assertion, the
TMQL discussion in Austin wasn't about a processing model, but a data
model. We need a data model in order to describe a processing model. 
Everything (the processing model, the query language, the ability to
create interoperable implementations, etc.) relies on an accurate
data model. I don't find it in the UML diagrams, and I'm hoping a formal
graph language can provide this. Sam has asked several times if anyone
knows of a formal graph modelling language, to no avail.

I'm skeptical that the current climate will produce it, but remain 
somewhat optimistic because Sam is still trying. We're no longer all
around the table, but we still all seem to be in the same room. Or
at least I hope that is true, despite statements lately.

> I would say that the same is the case for ordinary users. The
> infoset-based approach provides the reader with a very easy to grasp
> overview of what the model actually looks like.

Yet there are those who have a difficult time with the W3C infoset too.

> So while you can of course specify the processing model using a graph
> I think doing so would make the model harder to write and also harder
> to read. That is the primary reason why I oppose that approach.

I hope you too can remain open-minded about graph models. We've got a 
long way to go towards promoting community at this point. I think the 
discussion that your alternative proposal evokes is valuable, as I've 
told you before.

Murray

...........................................................................
Murray Altheim                            <mailto:altheim&#x40;eng.sun.com>
XML Technology Center
Sun Microsystems, Inc., MS MPK17-102, 1601 Willow Rd., Menlo Park, CA 94025

      In the evening
      The rice leaves in the garden
      Rustle in the autumn wind
      That blows through my reed hut.  -- Minamoto no Tsunenobu

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-~>
Secure your servers with 128-bit SSL encryption!
Grab your copy of VeriSign's FREE Guide,
"Securing Your Web site for Business." Get it now!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/KVNB7A/e.WCAA/bT0EAA/2n6YlB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

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

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

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/