Re: for the telecon: belaboring the obvious

Steve,

A last minute response. ;-)

Would your vision encompass the following:

1) Development of "stand-alone standards" such as SDShare?

2) Development of ecosystems of inter-dependent standards, such as TMDM 
+ syntaxes + TMCL (for example)?

3) Development of modest additions to other standards or software (such 
as bringing subject identity syntax/models to Solr, which would be a 
huge user base)?

With the caveat that WG3 needs to regain a expectation of timely 
production of documents/standards.

Hope you are at the start of a great day!

Patrick


On 11/20/2011 09:32 PM, Steve Newcomb wrote:
> WG3 is an institution useful for the development and publication of
> international standards for the interchange and/or processing of
> subject-oriented information.  WG3 has survived in an embryonic and
> turbulent arena for a pretty long time.  It has somehow maintained a
> place for itself in the world.  Maybe that longevity is useful.
>
> WG3's agenda cannot be inconsistent with the agendas of its
> international participants and their funders.  Participation is the
> lifeblood of WG3.  From WG3's perspective, participants are the sole
> source of WG3's energy.
>
> When participants agree that there is an opportunity for WG3 to
> develop a given standard, large or small, and when participants have
> pledged sufficient resources, then, with the consent of WG3, those
> participants should undertake the development, acting on behalf of
> WG3.
>
> One implication of this "allow a hundred flowers" approach is that WG3
> would not claim any kind of unified architectural vision.  It would
> neither claim nor require that all of its standards products conform
> to any sort of meta-standard.
>
> Another implication is that WG3 projects should not interfere with
> each other.  In general, participants should not withhold their
> consent to WG3 undertaking any project on the basis of any existing
> standard or doctrine.
>
> WG3's engagement in a diverse program of work will make WG3's
> usefulness more obvious, and it is very likely to provide the most
> public benefit.  Nobody can predict the future, and natural selection
> is not beneficial if there are not enough things to select from, and
> everything dies.
>
> So, for example, if a participant says he or she wants to develop an
> international standard for the interchange and/or processing of
> subject-oriented information, and if sufficient resources are
> available, then that standard is exactly what WG3 should develop,
> perhaps along with others.
>
> Steve Newcomb
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> topicmapmail mailing list
> topicmapmail-Zo64W7twoUFWk0Htik3J/[email protected]
> http://www.infoloom.com/mailman/listinfo/topicmapmail
>


-- 
Patrick Durusau
patrick-Q/[email protected]
Chair, V1 - US TAG to JTC 1/SC 34
Convener, JTC 1/SC 34/WG 3 (Topic Maps)
Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300
Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps)

Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net
Homepage: http://www.durusau.net
Twitter: patrickDurusau