[xtm-wg] Re: Smalltalk Implementation of Topic Maps

[dschwzr@iam.unibe.ch]

> Where did you read that "in topic maps everything is a topic".
> That is not the case. Whoever wrote it is WRONG!!!!

this was my overstated interpretation of a paper of rafal ksiezyk:
(http://www.infoloom.com/gcaconfs/WEB/granada99/ksi.HTM#N28)

> For example, a name is not a topic. (It can be *reified* as a topic,
> but until then it's just a plain ol' characteristic.)
> 
> Also, as I pointed out earlier, *topics do not have scope*.

so i introduced an abstract class "characteristic". or was this too 
radical?
(http://www.iam.unibe.ch/~dschwzr/diploma/topicmaps/TMCore2001-04-
28.jpg)

> Topic *elements* can have scope *attributes* (in the ISO syntax),
> but this is just a shorthand for specifying (additional) themes
> that are common to all the name and occurrence characteristics
> specified by that element.
> 
> Steve

daniel


To Post a message, send it to:   xtm-wg@eGroups.com

To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: xtm-wg-unsubscribe@eGroups.com 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/