[sc34wg3] occurrence - basename fuzzy border
Tue, 25 Feb 2003 10:46:31 +0100
At 23:30 24.02.2003 +0100, Lars Marius Garshol wrote:
>| I interpreted this to be a very clear statement that we would *not*
>| be adding new features.
>Sure. And if you considered yourself bound by that statement would you
>not have shot down the occurrence variant proposal based on that
I do feel bound by that statement, and yes, I would have shot down the
occurrence variant proposal if I were convinced that it was mere
But as you yourself pointed out, we *did* add what might be regarded as
a new feature (typed names) in order to fix the TNC bug. Some people
already regarded the lack of typed names to be a bug in its own right
because it meant inconsistency in the model (names were the only topic
characteristics that could not be typed).
The same argument might be applied to occurrence variants - that the lack
of them is a bug in the model because it makes the model inconsistent.
In that case, adding occurrence variants would be a bug fix, not a new
This is the issue that I am trying to elucidate.
I do firmly believe that we should not be adding new features at this
stage, or in any way extending what we already have, unless we feel it
is absolutely necessary.
Steve Pepper, Chief Executive Officer <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Convenor, ISO/IEC JTC1/SC34/WG3 Editor, XTM (XML Topic Maps)
Ontopia AS, Waldemar Thranes gt. 98, N-0175 Oslo, Norway.
http://www.ontopia.net/ phone: +47-23233080 GSM: +47-90827246