[sc34wg3] Return to DM Conformance

Patrick Durusau sc34wg3@isotopicmaps.org
Tue, 25 Nov 2003 05:40:46 -0500


I did my last presentation yesterday and have slept on the DM 
conformance issue for two nights and tender the following explanation:

To no small degree, I think my prior posts conflated use of the DM by 
two very distinct sets of materials. The first case, I would illustrate 
with reference to ISO 8879. (This is not an exact analogy but just an 

8879 5. Notation, defines a notation that is used in 8879. I note that 
8879 6. uses that notation but does not claim conformance to it. Leaving 
aside the statements 5. that it is for presentation of the standard, the 
point being that within a standard, one part does not claim conformance 
to the other parts.

The second case, which I think applies to TMCL/TMQL, is where a separate 
standard relies upon another.

By way of illustration, ISO 10744, notes:

*******ISO 10744*******
11.1 Conforming HyTime document
If a HyTime document complies with all provisions of this International 
Standard and is a conforming SGML document as defined in ISO 8879, it is 
a conforming HyTime document.
******/ISO 10744*******

Again, not an exact match since HyTime requires conformance with itself 
and also 8879 but it illustrates how one standard refers to another.

When I am in a topic maps standard, I think it should be indicated in 
some manner that another other standard is being relied upon/conformed 
to/etc. in the one that I am reading.

Without going further, does that help distinguish the cases we are 
talking about?

Will be offline most of the rest of the day.

Hope you are having a great day!


Patrick Durusau
Director of Research and Development
Society of Biblical Literature
Chair, V1 - Text Processing: Office and Publishing Systems Interface
Co-Editor, ISO 13250, Topic Maps -- Reference Model

Topic Maps: Human, not artificial, intelligence at work!