[xtm-wg] name - occurrence? (food for thought) was: Topic Naming Constra

Using baseName as controlled vocabulary worries me a little bit.

As size of a topic map grows via either merging

(process described in the processing model) or simple editing

(surprise! it may give more problems then merging!)

one has to either scramble baseName or

add themes to baseName scopes.

Neither one of this approaches looks right to me.

1)Scrambling terns baseName into

a non-human readable "id"

2)Adding themes to baseName scope I will consider bellow:

Some times topic's identity can be formed

by a set of characteristics along with topic name.

For example, for merging purposes my address

could be as good as my name if not better.

My date of birth is another candidate.

All three together are even better!

What current processing model is saying

is that upon such a necessity,

one should add one of the topic

characteristics to the scope

of base name to ensure distinguishibility.

Also when I see:

<baseNameString>Steve Newcomb</baseNameString>

</baseName>

(Steve, forgive me I keep using your name from the example you suggested)

I tend to think that Steve might have another

undisclosed name that he uses when visiting New York:-))

And this is why he does not have a name in the unconstrained scope.

In fact, what happened here is that one of

Steve's characteristics (address) becomes a scope of his name!

I believe it is wrong!

This is completely conceptually different from scoping

a name with the language it is expressed in!

I claim that my address is not the scope of my name but my occurrence!

And that my name is just another <resourceData> occurrence.

And <subjectIdentity> can reference all these occurrences to identify an individual.

So if name is not enough to identify the subject, - add address and date of birth

and make it an "AND".

</subjectIdentity>

or may be:

<resourceData>Dallass</resourceData>

</occurrence>

</occurrence>

<resourceData>Steve Newcomb</resourceData>

</occurrence>

</subjectIdentity>

Where all

#address-subject-indicator, #dob-subject-indicator and #base-name

are instances of #subjectIndicatorRef

I personally prefer the first. Also it would not require DTD change.

But those who like verboseness may prefer the second :-))

Note that I scoped occurrence within subject identity...

Scope here helps resolving the basName String.

Just like urn:isbn:8768787-987

is an address in the scope of Bowker (isbn) agency.

I believe that all the ":" separated strings within URN form the scope of a name.

This is just a food for thoughts...

Thanks,

Nikita.

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

topicmaps-comment message