Re: [topicmaps-comment] What Is The Type Of A Reified Topic?

["Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@comcast.net>]

[Lars Marius Garshol]

>
> * Thomas B. Passin
> |
> | Suppose we have a class-subclass classification established.  To be
> | concrete, suppose we have
> |
> | Class
> |     Service
> |         Web Service
> |             WSDL (the Class)
> |
> | Now WSDL is a class, a subclass of Web Service, and an instance,
> | presumably, of Class.  This lets us classify instances as being of
> | type (instanceOf) WSDL.
>
> Well, you have to be clear as to what you mean by "WSDL" here. It
> sounds as though it should really be "Web Service using WSDL", rather
> than "WSDL" as such.
>
> | Suppose we also want to talk about WSDL as a subject as well as
> | having it be a classification category.  That's easy, we create
> | another topic, whose subject could be WSDL (the Class).
>
> You mean, you create another topic that reifies the first? If so, the
> two are going to merge, as they will then have the same subject. So I
> don't think that is what you want.
>
No, it's not.

> I think what you want is two topics:
>
>   "Web Service using WSDL"
>   "The WSDL language"
>
Something like this.  The real point I'm thinking about is that one is used
for classifying other instances, and the other is the subject of assertions,
remarks, etc.  After all, we can talk about "animal" as if it were an
instance of something (e.g., "an animal can make a good pet") , even though
it is otherwise used as a classification category.

> | But what type should this new, reifying topic be?
>
> I am not sure, it depends on what aspect of it you consider to be the
> most essential. "XML application" is one possibility. "Specification"
> is another. "Web technology" a third.
>
> | We are not looking at it as a category but as a subject in its own
> | right.  Or maybe its subject should not be WSDL, the Class, after
> | all.  Maybe we will establish a new PSI for WSDL, or indicate its
> | subject by referencing the URL of the WSDL Rec.  But then, what is
> | the relationship between WSDL (the Class), and this new topic, WSDL
> | the Subject?
>
> I think the relationship is that every single instance of the first
> topic makes use of the second topic. That is, you could have a
> uses-technology association between every instace of "Web Service
> using WSDL" and "the WSDL language". That would be bad modelling for
> sure, but I am not sure how to make this assertion about the class.
>
> Does this work for you?

Not yet.  If it looks like bad modeling, we probably don't have quite the
right idea   yet.  What about using scopes?  In one scope, the topic
participates in a superclass-subclass association and is the target of
instanceOf values, in another scope it is the subject of various assertions.
Hmm, that would only apply to its name, which is probably not quite right
either.

Cheers,

Tom P