[topicmapmail] Controlled Linking and Modular Topic Maps

[thomas]

--On Wednesday, September 1, 2004 6:49 PM +0100 Murray Altheim 
<m.altheim@open.ac.uk> wrote:

>   If we were working on an XTM 1.1 syntax (which I hope we're not),

this made me wonder a bit wether there is a real interest in the community 
to publish XTM 1.1 or not. not that i think that every word on this list 
has to be commented immediatly but - anyway, it made me wonder.

XTM 1.1 is on my radar for more than a year now, i'm sort of waiting for it 
and i don't know what holds XTM 1.1 back. i don't understand the process. 
is there still work to do? are there "political" issues, related to the 
dispute around the reference model and the application model (i omit the 
acronyms here because i'm not sure if i get the current ones right)?

for me this is a quite important question. on the one hand i have a 
multilingual thesaurus in my application and as far as i know that's not 
possible to model with XTM 1.0 because of the TNC. on the other hand i 
won't make some additions to XTM 1.0 which work in some topic map engine, 
get ignored in the second one and certainly break when validation is turned 
on. that's not the way i want to work with standards and imho it's also not 
the way in which standards work.

perhaps i'm not seeing the forest because of all the trees, then i would be 
glad to be corrected. and please forgive my impatience (and my english, if 
need be)!

ciao
thomas                                                      thomas@stray.net