OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

topicmaps-comment message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]


Subject: RE: [xtm-wg] Topic Naming Constraint question


Lars Marius Garshol wrote:
>
> What I am after in this discussion is one of two things:
>
>  - a way of modeling this case that avoids the TNC without requiring
>    the topic map to include contorted or unnatural constructs
>

I would suggest that you accept that baseName is performing more than a
labelling role. It is a mechanism for establishing identity (in combination
with scope). As Nikita has suggested, there are means of providing a label
without establishing identity - <variant> or <occurrence>.

When modelling the topic map structure for an application such as this,
determining what is a valid mechanism for establishing identity is a key
principal - and if you want to avoid situations like this, you need to avoid
using string values for baseName which are not identity-establishing.

In this case, I would suggest that you revisit your use of baseName by
considering whether or not the strings you use, in the context of their
scope define a valid and sufficiently unique identity for the subject.
"Standard Name" is not sufficiently unique - as shown by this example and
that perhaps "Standard name in the context of the defining standards body"
is sufficiently unique - that would indicate that your baseName string
should be the standard name and the scope for that baseName should be a
topic representing the standards body which produced it. If you do this, you
are saying that the name "XML Query Language" is valid only as an
identity-establishing name string for the subject of XML-QL when considered
in the context of the standards body which produced XML-QL, and "XML Query
Language" is valid only as an identity-establishing name string for the
subject of XQL in the context of the standards body responsible for that
standard. I would also suggest that you consider the scoping of the acronyms
too - TLA's are notorious for becoming overloaded.

Cheers,

Kal


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-~>
eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups
Click here for more details
http://us.click.yahoo.com/kWP7PD/pYNCAA/4ihDAA/2n6YlB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

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

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

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 




[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]


Powered by eList eXpress LLC