[xtm-wg] Terminology and Readability

[Dave Pawson <daveP@dpawson.freeserve.co.uk>]

I'm getting stuck 'reading' the few instances of tm's that I've found.

E.g.
<assoc type="at-played-instrument-in">
     <assocrl type="tt-band">t-the-beatles</assocrl>
     <assocrl type="tt-vocalist" 
          anchrole="vocalist">t-lennon-john t-mccartney-paul</assocrl>
     <assocrl type="tt-guitarist">t-harrison-george t-lennon-john</assocrl>
     <assocrl type="tt-bassist">t-mccartney-paul</assocrl>
     <assocrl type="tt-drummer">t-starr-ringo</assocrl>
   </assoc>

I can 'read this' (as in human prior to setting up mc interpretation) as:
   topic John Lennon plays the role vocalist 
     in the association 'played-instrument-in 
   and
   topic John Lennon plays the role vocalist 
     in the association 'played-instrument-in 
     the band 'the-beatles'

fine.

In the example:
  <assoc  scope="st-family" type="is-married-to">
   <assocrl anchrole="husband">george</assocrl>
   <assocrl anchrole="wife">cara</assocrl>
  </assoc>

I 'read' topic george plays the role of husband in the
association is-married-to
and
topic cara plays the role of wife in the 
association is-married-to.

again, fine.

What I'm stuck with is interpreting the fact that within
the element assoc, there are a number of assocrl elements.

How should I 'read' the fact that there are 2,3,4 children
of the assoc element?
something like:
   the 'is-married-to' association is between george and cara
works fine for this example.

For the first one I'm less sure.

?the played-instrument-in association is between
... a band/some people/
this only makes sense if I bring in the association role.

I then go back and read the second example as
  goerge plays the role husband in the is-married-to association,
likewise cara plays the role wife in the is-married-to association.

Now I read 
the-beatles plays the role  'is-band' in the played-instrument-in assoc.
t-lennon-john t-mccartney-paul play the role vocalist in the played-instrument in association.
(which makes less sense).

question (finally). Am I reading this right?

Is there an xml example with a slightly higher level of abstraction
which might be 'read' as I am reading this? One that deals in
topics, associations and roles perhaps?
I'd certainly find it helpful.

TIA, DaveP


  





-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
Your family still won't know what you do.  At least they'll know where.
The resources, brainpower & breadth of opportunities at Microsoft are
unmatched. The only question is are you ready for that kind of impact?
http://click.egroups.com/1/9223/4/_/337252/_/971004007/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

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

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