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

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

* Nikita Ogievetsky
| 
| I do not think that PM should be a tutorial on how to write programs.

We agree on that.

| I was always thinking that PM should be a model, just like CM, but
| on a lower level.

If 'lower' here means 'more concrete and detailed' we agree on this as
well. 

| Sort of Assembler versus C++.

C++ is not very high-level, but I see your point. :-)

| I do not know of any notation other then graph to represent PM clear
| and vendor-independently.

Do you mean that the 'XML infoset'-like model is neither clear nor
vendor-indpendent? If so, could you explain why?

I could also think of many other possible notations: HyTime property
sets, EXPRESS schemas, IDL modules, even UML models.
 
| Strawman approach is nice as a start.
| Tables are great as the middle solution.
| Clear graph notation should be our outer goal.

Does this mean 'strawman' is nice, tables better, and that the best of
all would be a clear graph model? If so, how do you think a graph
model is better than an infoset-based approach? So far, nobody has
said anything in answer to that last question.

(BTW, I am very happy to see Nikita and Murray joining the debate.
IMHO we need a debate of these things to settle these issues.)

--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/