Re: [lexidma] Relational remodeling: the diagram

Hi John,

On Wed, 10 Feb 2021 at 14:06, John McCrae <john.mccrae@insight-centre.org> wrote:

Hi Michael,

I was working on my own diagram that I put here:
I think we are on a similar path, although there are some difference in modelling

I am kind of assuming that every element can have an ID and some way of making child elements.

Yes but not a obligatory ID. May I recall that best IDs are natural IDs and we should not enforce artificialÂIDs where they are not necessary.Â

I allow elements to appear in many places, e.g., examples can be of entries, senses, collocation, so I use structure over specific classes ('CollocationExampleTranslation')

That's an absolutely unwanted feature from the processing point of view. One of the reasons to make the model is to avoid things like this, especially as they are not necessary to convey the associated information.Â

E.g. a translation can be of many things of course -- but it is different type of translation and it should be exactly specified like that.

Best

Milos

lexidma message