Re: [regrep-semantic] Groups - New Action Item #0001 Issue: Should weinclude context in ontology element relationships

[Farrukh Najmi <Farrukh.Najmi@Sun.COM>]

ewallace@cme.nist.gov wrote:

>Evan Wallace (ewallace@cme.nist.gov) has submitted a new issue.
>
>Number: #0001
>Description: Issue: Should a relation between a RegistryObject and an 
>ontology element be qualified by context
>Owner: Evan Wallace (ewallace@cme.nist.gov)
>
>Comments: 
>Evan Wallace 2004-02-24
>There may be different views of an object in a Registry that would be best
>associated with different ontology elements based on some context.  This would
>essentially require support for multiple relations from a RegistryObject to 
>ontology elements, where each relation may be qualified by its context. 
>
>In the RIM, Classification is already a reified relation between a 
>RegistryObject and its classification information.   Furthermore, its 
>multiplicity already allows multiple relations for a given RegistryObject, so 
>adding attributes to Classification object to indicate context seems an easy 
>way to support this proposed Registry feature.
>
>
>-Evan
>  
>
Evan,

The current RIM 2.5 spec suggests that one should Classify a 
Classification to provide context for it.
How does this compare with the alternative of adding a context attribute 
to Classification?

-- 
Regards,
Farrukh