[xtm-wg] Questions about Merging.

["Jason Diamond" <jason@injektilo.org>]

Hi.

Regarding Annex F (XTM Processing Requirements), if these are requirements
why are they labelled informative and not normative?

Why is there no "Subject Equivalence Principle"? Is this assumed to be
derived from Section 2.4 (Merging)?

Section 2.4 (Merging) states that topics have the same subject if "they have
one or more subject indicators in common". Is this meant to include the
<topicRef> elements located inside the topics' <subjectIdentity> elements or
just the <subjectIndicatorRef> elements?

Postcondition 3 of F.5.1 (Topic merge operation) says "The set of subject
indicators of M is equal to the union of the set of subject indicators of A
and B." Does this also include <topicRef>s? If so, then if a <topicRef> and
<subjectIndicatorRef> are determined to be equivalent using F.3.1
(Equivalence of <subjectIndicatorRef> and <topicRef>), which one is
discarded? This might be a moot point since B.4 (Referencing the Subject)
only shows that a Topic has zero or more SubjectIndicators. Unless, of
course, this includes <topicRef>s.

What I'm wondering is this: do XTM processors differentiate between
<subjectIndicatorRef>s and <topicRef>s after deserializing an XTM document?
So, if the in-memory topic map was reserialized, should the
<subjectIdentity> element contain identical <topicRef> and
<subjectInidcatorRef> elements as the original document?

Postcondition 2 of F.5.1 (Topic merge operation) says "The set of name
characteristics of M is equal to the union of the set of name
characteristics of A and B." If two topics are deemed to have the same
subject according to 2.4 (Merging) by virtue of having one subject indicator
in common but both topics have different base names in the same scope, which
base name gets discarded? The reason I ask is because 2.2.2.1 (Base Name)
says "Base names are subject to the topic naming constraint, which prohibits
a processed topic map from containing multiple topics with the same base
name in the same scope." (The definition for topic naming constraint, by the
way, doesn't state this although the definition for base name does.)

Does the topic naming constraint apply to base names in the unconstrained
scope? Topic "t35" in F.5.1 (Topic merge operation) contains two base names
in the unconstrained scope. If multiple base names within the unconstrained
scope are allowed then does Topic A (with only one base name in the
unconstrained scope) address the same subject as Topic B (with two base
names in the unconstrained scope) if Topic A's base name matches only one of
Topic B's or would Topic A be required to have both of Topic B's?

Thanks,

Jason Diamond
http://injektilo.org/


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-~>
eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups
Click here for more details
http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/337252/_/981876157/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

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

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