[sc34wg3] Compact syntax requirement question
Wed, 20 Jul 2005 16:22:42 +0200
> It seems to me that to the extent that a CTM syntax is intended to
> permit an easier way to write a TM, it needs to represent in shorthand
> all or a subset of the capabilities and limitations of XTM. So if XTM
I wouldn't see CTM so much XTM related but more TMDM related. CTM
will be a notation for Topic Maps and not something like a "linear XTM
> requires an ID on the topic, so should CTM. If it doesn't, aren't we
> creating something different? And if we allow a topic with no ID,
> should we not also permit that in XTM?
It _is_ permitted in XTM 1.1 to define a topic without an ID!
And I think it will be permitted in CTM to create a topic without an
ID, just using an subject locator / subject identifier or some
notation to tell the parser "I do not care about the ID"