Comments on the ballot text

Here are my comments on the ballot text. I've restricted myself to
what I believe to uncontroversial errors. I've also cast my ballot as
"Yes", without any comments.

  1: ... the replacement of [ISO 13250:2002] and [XTM 1.0] by a new
  multipart standard. Definitions are therefore best sought in the
  [SAM] Committee Draft.

This should be ISO 13250:2003. Also, we should stop using the term SAM
now that we finally have the correct name and a part number for the
data model.

  2.1: It corresponds exactly to the term 'resource' in RDF (defined
  in [RFC 2966] as "anything that has identity").

Should be RFC 2396.
 
  2.1: In Topic Maps, 'resource' is used in the more restricted sense
  of "network retrievable information resource".

The only formal term is "information resource". I think we should use
"information resource" throughout, even though it may be slightly more
awkward. (2966 appears again further down in the same paragraph.)

  3.1.2: ... an human-interpretable ...

Should be "a human-interpretable".

  3.2.5: Publisher is to be understood here according to the Dublin
  Core definition ...

There should be a formal reference to Dublin Core.

-- 
Lars Marius Garshol, Ontopian         <URL: http://www.ontopia.net >
GSM: +47 98 21 55 50                  <URL: http://www.garshol.priv.no >