Re: [topicmaps-comment] TAO vs. ERA

[Lars Marius Garshol <larsga@garshol.priv.no>]

* Bernard Vatant
|
| I think you are right. There is no <scope> in <instanceOf>, which
| means when you declare an instantiation this way, it's an "absolute"
| one. If you want to scope it, you have to create explicit class role
| and instance role. IMO this is an inconsistency in the spec, since
| <instanceOf> is a shortcut for an association, and hence should be
| "scopable".

It's not an inconsistency in this sense, since the thinking is that if
you want an unscoped reference you use <instanceOf>, which is quick
and easy. If you want to scope the reference you use an association.
It's just a limitation of the shorthand notation. 

* Thomas B. Passin
| 
| The whole situation can get out of hand rapidly.  Take an instanceOf
| that refers to a topic.  The various names of that topic could in
| theory have their own scopes.  Does that mean that the original
| thing is NOT an instanceOf when the referenced topic (has a name
| characteristic that) is out of scope?  

Absolutely not! The scopes of the names have nothing to do with the
validity of the instance-of associations. The scopes of the names
limit the validity of the names, and nothing else.

| Extending this line of nasty inquiry, the scope topics themselves
| (their characteristics, of course) could be out of scope.  Do they
| then apply or not?

There is no such thing as scope on a topic, so I don't know what you
are talking about here.
 
| I don't think it is useful to use scopes with topics when they are
| applied as scopes or instanceOfs.  Does anyone have any examples
| that show the opposite here?

What do you mean by "use scopes with topics"? Another thing is that
you can't scope the inclusion of a topic in a scope.

--Lars M.