[topicmapmail] Announcement of XML Schema for ISO 13250 Topic Maps

[Bernard Vatant]

<Murray>
Also, I'm guessing that your implementation deliberately ignores the
existence of the XTM syntax. Why? What application puts a higher priority
on XLink use than interoperable, interchangeable syntax? Just curious.
<Murray>

I second Murray, being even more perplex than curious :
Some features of ISO 13250 have been *deliberately * let down by XTM 1.0
for clarity and simplification's sake, through collective reflexion of the
AG, like facets for instance. (I consider it a good thing, for I really
never understood what the hell facets represented and what they could be
used to). So I wonder what is going to happen for XML schemas still using
those "obsolete features" (obsolete from XTM viewpoint). They won't be
XTM-conformant, will they ? But OTOH, is XTM 1.0 completely conformant to
ISO 13250, since it let down those features ? Is the ISO 13250 bound to
stand still or will it be reviewed to be more coherent with XTM ? And what
is the role of XML Schema in all that ?
On the air for 2001 is the convergence and hopefully unification of
XTM-RDF. That seems to be the line in W3C, as we have seen lately in
Washington XML 2000. What is the position of ISO there ?

Are we going to have "ISO-conformant" applications, and "XTM-conformant"
applications and then
 "XML-Schema-for-ISO-13250-conformant" applications ... and what next ?


---------------------------------------
Bernard Vatant
bernard@universimmedia.com
www.universimmedia.com
"Building Knowledge"
---------------------------------------