[sc34wg3] SAM issue: locator-notation-support
Lars Marius Garshol
12 Feb 2003 18:03:30 +0100
* Steve Pepper
| Apart from URIs, does the SAM need to support any other locator
| notations explicitly?
The SAM doesn't really support any locator notations directly, since
the SAM itself is independent of what locator notation is used. The
"registry", if you can call it that, of notation names is found in the
SAM, however, as that is the logical place for it.
So there are really two questions hiding here:
a) what locator notation names should the SAM declare, and
b) what locator notations should it require implementations to
The proposal from Graham and me, not yet formally put forward, is
that SAM should declare the "URI" and "HyTime" locator notation
names. We'd like to hear from people knowledgeable about HyTime
whether they think this is enough. That is, can all HyTime locators be
fully represented as a string? If not, we may to change the locator
model in the SAM.
As for what notations we should require support for we decided that
the SAM shouldn't require anything in this respect. Each syntax
requires support for one or more locator syntaxes (HyTM -> HyTime,
XTM -> URIs, LTM -> URIs, AsTMa= -> URIs etc) anyway, so what an
implementation must support do will in any case be decided by what
syntaxes it supports.
 A document with our proposals is being prepared and will be
published when it's complete.
Lars Marius Garshol, Ontopian <URL: http://www.ontopia.net >
GSM: +47 98 21 55 50 <URL: http://www.garshol.priv.no >