Re: [topicmaps-comment] Topic, reifiying an adressable subject as rolein an association

[Nikita Ogievetsky <nogievet@cogx.com>]

Christian,

Yes, this is a constraint that can not be enforced through DTD.
Especially because "addressability" of a topic may become clear only after
merging.
In my practice, I am reporting an error if such a situation occurs.

And a general topic map software should trace and report such errors both
1) when parsing a topic map
2) when merging parsed topic maps

Hope this helps,

--Nikita.

Nikita Ogievetsky, nogievet@cogx.com
Cogitech, Inc.       ||    Cogito Ergo XML
http://www.cogx.com     (917) 406-8734

----- Original Message -----
From: "Christian Wohlgensinger" <wohlgensinger@mondax.com>
To: <topicmaps-comment@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 3:31 AM
Subject: [topicmaps-comment] Topic, reifiying an adressable subject as role
in an association


> Can a Topic referenced by a <topicRef> in a <roleSpec> element reify an
> addressable subject?
>
> To me, this semantically makes no sense, but different to the
Class-Instance
> case in which the XTM Standard explicitly prohibits (although in the
> informative Annex F), that the topic, playing the class role, can reify an
> addressable subject (Annex F3.2), I wasn`t able to find any such passage
(in
> XTM 1.0, TMPM4 and the Infoset model) dealing with the role in an
> association.
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
>
>