[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: [xtm-wg] Correct use of published subjects
Steve Pepper wrote: [...] > Boy, oh boy! I just can't believe it is possible to miscommunicate > so thoroughly. Is it the Atlantic or what? I don't think that this has anything to do with physical distance. > Lars Marius raised a number of issues. I'm amazed that nobody has > had a single substantive word to say about any of them. (Is this > really the technical forum of the XTM working group?) Well, I'm not amazed that amongst all the verbiage you missed the substantive words that I did provide. On the subject of xml:base, in response to Lars Marius, I wrote on Wed, 27 Jun 2001 at 02:02:05 -0700: > For example, your understanding of xml:base is incorrect [1]. Some of > your comments reflect a misunderstanding of the difference between > a language and a language code (which is a profound difference). [...] The thread has wandered quite afield from its subject. Since the two topic maps in question are my creation, and since the principal subject at hand is my willingness or unwillingness to release them prior to having a process to release them into, I can only take your request as yet another criticism of my unwillingness to go into detailed discussion of the contents of the changes. Either that or you've not bothered to read the point I've made in almost every single message, and reiterated by several others. The discussion that needs occur should be part of the process of working through these issues that I am saving for a "reasoned, technical discussion" that I expect to happen under a recognized process. The more I go along in this forum without that, the more I realize that absent a process there's little hope that any such activity would be productive here. This past week has not been productive. Why should I believe a "technical" discussion would be moreso? I don't see "technical" responses to Steve and Michel's posting of their recent specs/DTDs. > Murray says that some of them are fixed already. Alas, we do not > know which, or what the fixes were. Please, Murray, show us your > latest version, so we don't waste time on non-issues. (You don't > need to "publish" them; just make them available to the WG.) I'm sorry, but I'm really tired of being bullied to release my work. Now I have two Ontopia employees demanding that I perform this stunt. I don't see that your request is any different than Lars Marius'. Another thing that I wrote in that same message: [...] > And before I go, let me clear one more fallacy. There is *absolutely > no danger* that the incorrectness of the country.xtm and language.xtm > topic maps will cause a problem for topic maps being currently > authored. The importance of these two topic maps is not their direct > functionality as XTM documents, but the establishment of a set of > Published Subject Indicators. The PSIs for "English" and "Kurdish" will > stay the same in an update. These topic maps could have had empty <topic> > elements with the same set of IDs and be functional for what people > need for authoring. There is no rush to update the internals of these, > except the rush you perceive. The updates for three character codes > will be available following a decision by the TC, and if someone has > a need for a language not currently available, a workaround until the > update would be simple to accomplish. And we're not that far from > Montreal. Steve Pepper wrote: > Once the non-issues are cleared away, let's have a reasoned, > technical discussion about whatever is left, and try to keep > personal feelings out of it. I feel that in order to have a reasoned, technical discussion, one must have either a legal system or some sense of understanding or community between the participants, ie., a formal or informal process. I have been a part of a theoretically formal process in this group that failed, and which I would not under any circumstances want to repeat. I am sure you remember. I don't see how functioning under no process at all in the current environment (personal, political, whatever) could be simply "technical." The OASIS process rules will hopefully provide what we need to have the "reasoned, technical discussion" you both want so badly. It is unlikely to occur here right now amongst the three of us. As I mentioned previously, the set of PSIs established by the existing language.xtm and country.xtm work completely well as PSIs, even if there are perceived errors in the topic map itself. There is no emergency here; we can wait six weeks. The xml:base problem you cite is simply a matter of Lars Marius misunderstanding the xml:base specification, which BTW went to Recommendation (along with [XLink]; we need to update our references in the XTM spec) at the W3C today. Read the xml:base spec, it's pretty clear that you are correct, not he. If I remember correctly, I confirmed our usage of xml:base with Eve Maler prior to incorporating it into the XTM DTD and the two topic maps. I prefer to have the remaining issues dealt with properly by the group, not by expecting the current climate on this issue to suddenly change to a "reasoned, technical" one. Murray > [1] Go look at the xml:base specification again before telling everyone > things are wrong. The example following Section 3 is quite clear: > http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlbase/#syntax (and now: http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/REC-xmlbase-20010627/#syntax ) [XLink] http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/REC-xlink-20010627/ ........................................................................... Murray Altheim <mailto:altheim@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 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/
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC