[sc34wg3] Documenting merging rules in TMDM .. and unmergingtoo

Ann Wrightson sc34wg3@isotopicmaps.org
Wed, 17 Mar 2004 13:44:26 -0000

1. We need to understand the RM/DM fit and how it can work practically as
well as theoretically

2. Merging and theories of identity will differ within the broader space
intended to be covered by the RM


3. TMDM is nearly there, & IMO will need annotation rather than amendment to
elucidate the fit with RM. That could include discussion of semantics as in
recent postings, and identifying limitations of DM that are loosened in RM.


4. We still have the problem that too much of the RM-concept is inside heads
rather than documented - though I do appreciate that work is in hand to
change that.

Ann W.

-----Original Message-----
From: sc34wg3-admin@isotopicmaps.org [mailto:sc34wg3-admin@isotopicmaps.org]
On Behalf Of Michel Biezunski
Sent: 17 March 2004 11:05
To: sc34wg3@isotopicmaps.org
Subject: Re: [sc34wg3] Documenting merging rules in TMDM .. and unmergingtoo

On Wed, 2004-03-17 at 05:01, Lars Marius Garshol wrote:
> * Bernard Vatant
> | 
> | And to answer the final (BV?), yes, my view is that the standard 
> | should define the declarative semantics (subject identity), and be 
> | agnostic about the operational ones (merging, mapping, whatever). 
> | Although it could provide non-normative best practices about the 
> | latter.
> Uh, so your opinion is that we should take the document currently 
> published as CD and entirely change our view of what it is and what it 
> does, and then rewrite it to support that?
> Or do I misunderstand you?

Good to see that you are open to the idea, Lars. It would certainly be
worthwhile to reconsider. Making a clear distinction such as the one
proposed by Bernard between the levels we are addressing would strenghten
the different parts rather than weaken them. The difference between the
declarative parts and the operational parts is at the heart of both SGML and
XML and that is I think why this family of standards have been so
successful. If we could succeed in doing something similar for the semantic
part, wouldn't that be great?

Michel Biezunski
Coolheads Consulting
402 85th Street #5C
Brooklyn NY 11209
Email: mb@coolheads.com
Web  : http://www.coolheads.com
Voice: (718) 921-0901

sc34wg3 mailing list