[sc34wg3] Return to DM Conformance

Patrick Durusau sc34wg3@isotopicmaps.org
Thu, 27 Nov 2003 11:19:08 -0500


Lars Marius Garshol wrote:
> * Patrick Durusau
> | 
> | 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.
> That I certainly agree with, and that's also required by the ISO
> directives. This is what the "Normative References" element is for.
> | Without going further, does that help distinguish the cases we are
> | talking about?
> Not really. I'm not sure there is a difference between your first and
> second case. I think XTM, TMCL, and TMQL all relate to TMDM in the
> same way. 
> Or did you mean that while there may be no practical difference there
> is a formal difference since XTM belongs to 13250, while TMCL and TMQL
> do not? If that's your point I'm with you.

Yes. Did not mean to imply a practical difference. Recall that formality 
is the soul of standards work. ;-) Even though we "know" there is no 
practical difference, that does not excuse us from making the proper 
references for the reader of either standard.

> I think the solution chosen for 8879 with regards to clauses 5 and 6
> is what we want in both cases, regardless of whether they are the same
> or different.
Perhaps, need to look for other examples. Would be easier if members had 
access to other ISO standards. I will see what I can find and will post 
back any language that looks interesting or that others have followed 
your suggestion.

I am still concerned about the "interpretation of topic map syntaxes" 
lanuage that I mentioned earlier. Understand that CXTM is so bound, no 
argument here, but don't think LTM is so bound. (Not that you would not 
follow the TMDM, but its relationship to the TMDM is different from that 
of CXTM. To some degree a question of formality, but I suspect cases 
outside the ISO process are inherently different. They can claim to 
follow an ISO specification, but cannot be bound by an ISO 
specification, unless they say they are following it. What if a topic 
map syntax (outside of ISO) says nothing about the TMDM, is 
interpretation of it bound by the TMDM?)

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!