[sc34wg3] Individual contribution on the U.S. N.B. position o nthe progress ion of Topic Map standards

Robert Barta sc34wg3@isotopicmaps.org
Sun, 4 Apr 2004 02:40:08 +1000

On Sat, Apr 03, 2004 at 12:43:25PM +0200, Jan Algermissen wrote:
> Jan Algermissen wrote:

> Consider this:
> Organization A has developed a topic map with specialed merging rules
> (e.g. merging based on latitude and longitute properties) and likes to
> hand this map to another organization (or maybe even to another department).
> Given your scenario, A needs to send the map, the Astma rules and the
> rule engine because without these three things the original intention
> cannot be communicated.
> Besides the open-source-ness of the engine in this situation this is
> what you actually call vendor lock-in.

Absolutely  correct. This is the reason  why I  think that TMCL should
allow me to specify these things. It should be an 'ontology definition
language', not just  a template thing "all topics  of type X must look
like this".