[xtm-wg] "subject-descriptor-ness" scoping topic

["Nikita Ogievetsky" <nogievet@cogx.com>]

[Steve]
> First of all, we decided that, as a practical matter, it's hard to see
> any reason why a topic should not regard its subject descriptor as an
> occurrence.

Great! It actually was missing in the ISO-13250 syntax model, although it
was in the conceptual model (prose):

[ISO-13250]
The distinction between a subject descriptor that happens to be a
definition and an ordinary occurrence of a definition is that, in the case
of the subject descriptor, the topic link's author has indicated (by
referring to it by means of the value of the identity attribute) that it is
to be regarded as the authoritative definition of the organizing principle
of the topic link. In the other case, by characterizing a definition as a
definitional occurrence, the author is merely acknowledging the existence of
the definition and its possible relevance to the subject of the topic link.


[Steve]  [1]
>  Anyway, in the graph, the presence of a special
> XTM-defined public subject -- conveying, among other things, the
> notion of "subject-descriptor-ness" -- in the scope of an occurrence
> indicates that the occurrence is a subject descriptor.

I like this approach!

[Steve]
> But there is a very real sense in which a subject descriptor applies
> to a topic node in the broadest, most unlimited scope possible.  Each
> subject descriptor is supposed to be absolutely self-sufficient: fully
> adequate to the task of identifying the subject unambiguously.  True,
> it may only be capable of identifying the subject to those who can
> read Mandarin Chinese, but it is nonetheless capable of fully and
> unambiguously conveying the whole subject.  A subject descriptor's
> special relationship to its topic node is not limited by scope.  It is
> not limited at all; it's really its identity in every sense.
> subject descriptor is a descriptor of the whole topic node.

Another example:
Social Security Number and driver license id being used in the scopes of
different institutions
nonetheless unambiguously identify the same whole subject (a person).
Theoretically, foreign passport identifies an individual unambiguously
no matter where he/she travels.
(some may already hate this one... nevertheless :-))

[Steve]  [2]
> Therefore, the distinction of being a subject descriptor is not
> conferred by adding a <topicRef> to a scope; the notion of scope does
> not apply here.  The distinction is conferred by using a <topicRef>,
> rather than a <resourceRef>, in the <resource> that specifies the
> information as an occurrence.
...
> * To specify the subject descriptor of a topic, make the subject
>   descriptor an occurrence of that topic.  However, instead of using
>   <resourceRef> to point at the subject descriptor, use <topicRef>
>   instead.

It seems contradictory to your [1] statement.

I still like "subject-descriptor-ness" scoping topic (theme).
Otherwise you can not state that a topic occurs in another topic
(you will have to use topicRef for this)
without implying identity.

Thanks,

Nikita.



-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/337252/_/973663852/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

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

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