[topicmapmail] First draft of the Standard Application Model

Thu, 6 Jun 2002 05:09:32 -0400

[Lars Marius Garshol]
I must admit that I don't understand the formalism used here,
nor the one used in your second iteration.

[wmj]
Formalism is simple especially if you familiar with the formal meaning of
the source diagram.
Diagrams are decomposed into a cluster of the following constructs:

==================
| Node i         |
| -------------- |
| Node Component |
|  ...           |
==================
      |  Edge head descriptors
      |
      |
      |
      |  Edge middle descriptors
      |
      |
      |
      |  Edge tail descriptors
      V
==================
| Node j         |
| -------------- |
| Node Component |
|  ...           |
==================

There is one such construct for each edge of the diagram. Node names, Node
Components and Edge descriptors are shared. Descriptor could be a node.

Please visit http://www.gen-strategies.com/AP-M/AP-M.htm to see 3P model
http://www.aptprocess.com/ site.
By clicking on "hotlinks" you will get some answers (and questions about
formalism?) about the site.

[Lars Marius Garshol]
We will try to provide more examples in later versions of the
document. It may take a while before one will be available, however.

[wmj]
It would be useful to have the examples matching your SAM. Thanks for
another email with the references to examples.
I will re-write one of the examples and "plug-in" into schema defined by
SAM.

[Lars Marius Garshol]
| I was unable to discover any inconsistencies between 7 diagrams of SAM.
That sounds good, though I don't know what it means.

[wmj]
The 7 diagrams in SAM document are physically disconnected. Integrating them
into one model (equivalent to one 'big' diagram) allows to do analysis. For
instance:  is the model representing a connected graph? Why the graph was
decomposed into 7 subgraph/diagrams? etc etc.

Regards

-----Original Message-----
From: topicmapmail-admin@infoloom.com
[mailto:topicmapmail-admin@infoloom.com]On Behalf Of Lars Marius Garshol
Sent: Sunday, June 02, 2002 9:04 AM
To: topicmapmail@infoloom.com
Subject: Re: [topicmapmail] First draft of the Standard Application
Model

* W. M. Jaworski
|
| "reading that document" was helpful.

That's good to hear. The SAM is intended to clear up a number of
things that were not as clear as they ought to be, so if it helped,
that's good.

| 'Re-writing' of the document into a 3P-able format gave me
| additional insight into the TM concepts and meta-model. The process
| of 're-writing' diagrams of the Standard Application Model (SAM) is
| illustrated in http://www.gen-strategies.com/tmModel/tMap.htm. The
| process consists of the source (in this case a diagram representing
| a partition of SAM) analysis to specify/create:
| (1) SET Identifications
| (2) Inter-Set SCHEMA design
| (3) Set Enumeration
| (4) CONTEXT DIAGRAM and/or CONTEXT MAP.

Hmmmm. I must admit that I don't understand the formalism used here,
nor the one used in your second iteration. Do you have documentation
of that formalism online anywhere?

We will try to provide more examples in later versions of the
document. It may take a while before one will be available, however.

| I was unable to discover any inconsistencies between 7 diagrams of SAM.

That sounds good, though I don't know what it means.

--
Lars Marius Garshol, Ontopian         <URL: http://www.ontopia.net >
ISO SC34/WG3, OASIS GeoLang TC        <URL: http://www.garshol.priv.no >

_______________________________________________
topicmapmail mailing list
topicmapmail@infoloom.com
http://www.infoloom.com/mailman/listinfo/topicmapmail