[topicmapmail] Fragmented XTM for web metadata, and some ontology?

[Robert Barta]

On Fri, Jun 27, 2003 at 05:36:39PM +0100, Kal Ahmed wrote:
> > So I think that we shoul NOT depricate resourceData.  Instead, we should
> > strengthen it so it can specify the type of the literal data it holds.
> > 
> 
> Absolutely. Though I go one step further. I don't want a reinvention of
> data typing. I just want to be able to include XML from namespaces other
> than the XTM one inside the resourceData element. Then I can use
> MyFavouriteSchemaLanguage to do not only datatyping but to express other
> constraints on the content. Then all I want after that is the ability in
> TMCL to restrict occurrences of particular types to having resourceData
> content from particular namespaces. Then I would be happy.

Kal,

Duly noted. But then I would assume that someone might also want to
check constraints on the data INSIDE the XML fragment as well.

This cannot/should not be done within TMCL but would have to be handed
off to the XML constraint language of the author's choice.

\rho