TITLE: | Issues list for 13250-6 Topic Maps -- Compact Syntax |
SOURCE: | Mr. Lars Heuer |
PROJECT: | WD 13250-6: Information technology - Topic Maps - Compact syntax |
PROJECT EDITOR: | Mr. Lars Heuer; Mr. Gabriel Hopmans; Dr. Sam Gyun Oh |
STATUS: | Issues list |
ACTION: | For discussion at the Oslo meeting |
DATE: | 2007-02-22 |
DISTRIBUTION: | SC34 and Liaisons |
REPLY TO: |
Dr. James David Mason (ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 34 Secretariat - Standards Council of Canada) Crane Softwrights Ltd. Box 266, Kars, ON K0A-2E0 CANADA Telephone: +1 613 489-0999 Facsimile: +1 613 489-0995 Network: jtc1sc34@scc.ca http://www.jtc1sc34.org |
Some of the issues may also appear at the TMQL issue list. They have to be discussed only once.
Currently CTM uses a dedicated template syntax. If the committee decides to keep TMQL predicates / functions as topics, the CTM editors should convert templates into topics, too
Since we received criticism at our previous draft, CTM has undergone a heavy syntax change.
We need information if we should go further down the road with the proposed syntax
We have different proposals: Either we use the same reification mechanizm as for other constructs or we use a dedicated syntax for it.
Proposal: Use a special topic ctm:self
to reify the topic map instance
Currently we use the sid
/ slo
syntax to assign subject
identifiers resp. subject locators to topics.
Proposal: Use the syntax from section 3.3.4 Topic References to assign subject identifiers / locators to topics
TMQL and CTM should use the same datatypes, we need a review which datatypes are natively supported
Does CTM contain syntax elements that do not play well with the syntax of TMQL?
Care should be taken for these syntactical constructs: