---

P-Member	APPROVAL OF THE DRAFT AS PRESENTED	APPROVAL OF THE DRAFT WITH COMMENTS AS GIVEN ON THE ATTACHED	DISAPPROVAL OF THE DRAFT FOR REASONS ON THE ATTACHED	DISAPPROVAL (appropriate changes in the text will change vote to APPROVAL)	ABSTENTION (For Reasons Below)	NO RESPONSE
Canada	X
China						X
Italy						X
Japan		X
Korea	X
Netherlands	X
Norway		X
United Kingdom			X
United States	X

Japan

1. General

Explanation for each item should be enriched.

2. Technical

"URI" should be changed to "IRI", because an IRI is a sequence of characters from the Universal Character Set (Unicode/ISO 10646) and allows to use non-Latin scripts in it.

3. Editorial

(3.1) Clause 1 Scope, 2nd paragraph, last sentence:

"generlised" should be "generalised".

(3.2) Clause 2 Normative references:

Version of Unicode should be 4.0.

(3.3) Clause 2. Normative references:

"IETF RFC 2396, ... " should be changed to "IETF RFC 3986, Uniform Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax ... , January 2005, available at HTTP: rfc3986.txt rfc www.ietf.org".

(3.4) Clause 2. Normative references:

"IETF RFC 2732, ... " should be deleted, because of it is included in IETF RFC 3986.

(3.5) Clause 2. Normative references:

"IETF RFC 3987, Internationalized Resource Identifiers (IRIs), Internet Standards Track Specification, January 2005, available at HTTP: rfc www.ietf.org rfc3987.txt" should be added.

(3.6) Terms and definitions:

The "Terms and definitions" clause should be added.

(3.7) Clause 3.1 Notation and Syntax:

"The syntax of TMQL is defined using ... "
should be
"The syntax of TMCL is defined using ... "

(3.8) Clause 4 TMCL, 1st paragraph, last sentence

"generlised" should be "generalised".

(3.9) Clause 4.2.13, 4.2.14, 4.2.15:

"Plays Role Schema" should be located first of these three schemas. The appropiate order of these three schemas is as follows:
  - Plays Role Schema
  - Role Schema
  - Other Player Schema

(3.10) Clause 4.2.20 Syntax for TMCL-Schema, 2nd definition from bottom:

"element-SimpleTopicExpression = element OrTopicScheme { ... "
should be
"element-OrTopicExpression = element OrTopicScheme { ... ".

Norway

1	2	(3)	4	5	(6)	(7)
MB1	Clause No./ Subclause No./ Annex (e.g. 3.1)	Paragraph/ Figure/Table/Note (e.g. Table 1)	Type of com-ment2	Comment (justification for change) by the MB	Proposed change by the MB	Secretariat observations on each comment submitted

NO	4.2		ed	The notation used to define the model should be explained before it is used and if possible made clearer. Consider using the infoset formalism already used by 13250-2 (TMDM).
NO	4.2		ed	For consistency with 13250, use “type” instead of “class” here and elsewhere.
NO	4.2.8		ed	For consistency with 13250, use “subject locator” instead of “subject address” here and elsewhere.
NO	4.2.22		ed	For consistency with 13250, use “association role” (or “role”) instead of “member” here and elsewhere.

United Kingdom

The formal definitions in the current draft cannot be fully reviewed until some explanatory text is added. The formal language needs to be properly documented so that reviewers can check the accuracy of the productions (The text in 3.1 is inaccurate.) Aspects relating to diagnostics and reporting should be left to application developers. Hooks should be used to identify where and when error conditions are to be reported.

Use Case Requirement: We need to be able to type topics and associations and define which types of topics associations can be used at specific levels in a "topic hierarchy".