[topicmapmail] XTM Datatypes [Was: Adding weigths to associations]

[Murray Altheim]

Lars Marius Garshol wrote:

> * Murray Altheim
> | 
> | What I believe would be necessary is the ability to characterize (in
> | this particular case) a resource as a floating point value, and
> | *then* state this as a confidence level.
> 
> I completely agree. Personally, I believe that data typing belongs in
> TMCL, so that XTM can stay as it is. (Though we may have to extend it,
> and the SAM, to allow XML content in <resourceData> elements.) This
> would allow us to assert that occurrences of type 'confidence' are
> always floating point numbers, and to have them interpreted as such.


What I'm interested in (at this point) is simply getting a set of
PSIs for those datatypes published. I've got the documents ready and
am hopefully going to get the directory and documents up on KMi's
server this week; can't do it on my own unless I post it on my own
site, and would rather publish at a more stable location.


> Kal's approach of allowing <resourceData> to contain XML, which can
> then be typed as desired using XML Schema/RELAX-NG is rather
> different, and has different implications for the stack of standards.
> I don't agree with it myself, but we should settle this discussion in
> favour of one of the approaches so that we can proceed.


I think if Kal reconsidered simply pointing at those resources
outside of the <topicMap> element but within the same document,
he'd not need to do something so ugly. :-)


> The issue of data typing strongly affects TMQL, of course. Data types
> will change how values are compared and sorted, which means that we
> have to keep all of XTM, SAM, TMCL, and TMQL in mind when discussing
> this. 


Certainly.

Murray

......................................................................
Murray Altheim                  <http://kmi.open.ac.uk/people/murray/>
Knowledge Media Institute
The Open University, Milton Keynes, Bucks, MK7 6AA, UK

            If you're the first person in a new territory,
            you're likely to get shot at.
                                                     -- ma