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

["Luis J. Martinez" <luisjm@luisjm.com>]

Lars wrote
> * 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).

I know it needs to be worked on, but I was hoping that it was the kind
of model you were looking for. The object model should expand all the
convenience features in the syntax and point out the derivations from
the conceptual model. Ones everything is explicit in an object model,
then we can move into processing.

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

I think we first need to agree in what xtm processing is before a
canonical form can be useful.

> --Lars M.


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-~>
Do you have 128-bit SSL encryption server security?
Get VeriSign's FREE Guide, "Securing Your
Web Site for Business." Get it now!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/2cW4jC/c.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/