[sc34wg3] Conformance

[Lars Marius Garshol]

* Robert Barta
| 
| Jan, 
| 
| I think it is quite simple:
| 
|   1) you create some implementation of what you think is a TM
|      implementation, in that you create your databases, internals,
|      whatever
| 
|   2) to "prove" that your application is "SAM conformant" you simply
|      define a mapping of concepts of SAM (and operations if we had
|      those) onto your API (or your API concepts).
 
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Jan already accepted this, and
what he is asking is whether step 2) has any value here. Personally, I
don't think it does, and I think the conformance requirements of the
syntaxes, APIs, and query/constraint languages will be all we will
need, but the opinions of others would be welcome on this.

| [ Hope I got it right in this abridged form ]

You did.
 
| True, but it will be more difficult to fool the outside if I ask
| your application to round-trip an XTM document.

Exactly. So why have your step 2) above?

-- 
Lars Marius Garshol, Ontopian         <URL: http://www.ontopia.net >
GSM: +47 98 21 55 50                  <URL: http://www.garshol.priv.no >