[sc34wg3] Compact syntax requirement question

Lars Heuer sc34wg3@isotopicmaps.org
Wed, 20 Jul 2005 16:22:42 +0200

Hi Steve,

> 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"

Best regards,