[sc34wg3] New TMDM draft

Lars Marius Garshol sc34wg3@isotopicmaps.org
Thu, 14 Jul 2005 10:02:48 +0200

* annec@cse.unsw.edu.au
| I have had a quick look and noted that the changes I requested in
| Amsterdam do not seem to be included, namely:
| 1. That Type-Instance and SuperType-Subtype Associatiations be shown
| in the E-R diagrams.
| 2. That these should be introduced in an earlier section of the
| document

That is correct. It was felt that this was not appropriate. We can
revisit this issue in Montr=E9al. (I've added it to the list of issues

| 3. That the descriptions for Topics should include reference to
| these constructs.

Such a reference was included, in the form of a NOTE at the end of
| Perhaps I have missed it, or did you and Graham decide not to go
| down this path?  If so, may I please ask for your line of reasoning
| on this?

The reasoning for not moving 7.2 and 7.3 was that:

 - currently only the model itself is defined in clause 5, and all
   subject identifiers in clause 7; to move clauses 7.2 and 7.3 breaks
   the organization of the document

 - the structure of the document is currently such that

     clause 4 defines the basics,
     clause 5 defines the model, building on 4,
     clause 6 defines merging, building on 5,
     clause 7 defines building blocks using the model (building on 5)

   so again the move would violate the structure of the document

 - the reasoning for moving 7.2 and 7.3 was to make them more
   prominent, but any person who works with a standard without reading
   the whole standard carefully is going to have serious problems
   anyway; ie: the lack of prominence was felt to be a not much of a

On balance, it seemed that the problems with moving the clauses were
greater than the benefits.

As for the creation of instance diagrams, quite frankly that was due
to time problems more than anything else. The editors are uncertain
how readable such diagrams will actually be, but are willing to at
least create them in order to evaluate whether they are readable or
not. If they do turn out to be readable and useful the editors are
likely to include them. (I've listed this, too, as an issue for

Lars Marius Garshol, Ontopian         <URL: http://www.ontopia.net >
GSM: +47 98 21 55 50                  <URL: http://www.garshol.priv.no >