Re: [xtm-wg] Comments on XTM Spec 1.0

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

Robert,

Sorry, I missed the first part of your e-mail.
I think this is an inconsistency in the spec that has to be fixed.
You are right it is not "the union" but "the intersection".

Nikita.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Robert Barta <rho@bigpond.net.au>
To: <xtm-wg@egroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2001 11:41 PM
Subject: [xtm-wg] Comments on XTM Spec 1.0


> Hi,
> 
> Maybe I missed that in this forum, but 
> 
>    http://www.topicmaps.org/xtm/1.0/xtm1-20001204.html#syn-scope
> 
> states that
> 
>    <quote>
>    ....The union of these elements' subject identity points specifies
> the context 
>    in which the assignment of the corresponding topic characteristic is
> considered 
>    to be valid. 
>    </quote>
> 
> So - for example - in
> 
>   <topic id="play-hamlet">
>     <baseName>
>       <scope><topicRef xlink:href="#plays"/></scope>
>       <scope><topicRef xlink:href="#shortname"/></scope>
>       <baseNameString>Hamlet</baseNameString>
>     </baseName>
>     <baseName>
>       <scope><topicRef xlink:href="#plays"/></scope>
>       <scope><topicRef xlink:href="#fullname"/></scope>
>       <baseNameString>The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of
> Denmark</baseNameString>
>     </baseName>
>     ...
>   </topic>
> 
> does now 'Hamlet' be a valid characteristic whenever the active (user)
> scope is 
> 
>   (a) #plays AND #shortname
> 
> or
> 
>   (b) plays OR #shortname
> 
> ? Given that you can have any number of alternative <baseName> sections,
> wouldn't
> it be more obvious not to use the 'union' but the 'intersection' above?
> This would
> be compatible with that merging rules.
> 
> Either way, having now a boolean expression somehow implicitly defining
> a semantics
> is an indication that there is somewhere a flaw.
> 
> In our implementation here, we now choose to constrain the scope to be
> _a single 
> topic_, but will lateron allow in some sort of algebraic expression to
> define this 
> scoping topic. At least, that's the plan...:-)
> 
> Any comments appreciated.
> 
> \rho
> 
> To Post a message, send it to:   xtm-wg@eGroups.com
> 
> To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: xtm-wg-unsubscribe@eGroups.com
> 
> 
> 

-------------------------------------------------------
Nikita Ogievetsky, Cogitech Inc.
http://www.cogx.com
nogievet@cogx.com
(917)406-8734
Consultant in XML/XSLT/Xlink/TopicMaps
Cogito Ergo XML




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

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