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

[Lars Marius Garshol <larsga@garshol.priv.no>]

* Luis J. Martinez
| 
| I submitted a object model a few month ago and Daniel was the only
| one to comment on it. If my approach was so bad,

Thanks for reminding me. I've wanted to look at that model for a long
time now, but have so far considered getting TopicMaps.Org to even
contemplate an approach different from the graph approach more
important than looking for (or at) alternatives.

| I would have like to know what was wrong with it.

Well, for one thing it has mergemaps in it. I don't think those belong
in the object model. It uses the term subjectIdentity for what XTM 1.0
calls subject indicators. Occurrences, associations and members have
multiple classes. Also, it leaves out the URIs of all objects. 
 
Overall I would say that it looks pretty good, but there are some
problems, and it's not detailed enough (but I guess you knew that).


BTW, I could return this question to you. What about canonical XTM?

--Lars M.


------------------------ 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/4cW4jC/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/