[sc34wg3] Question on TNC / Montreal minutes

[Jan Algermissen]

Lars Marius Garshol wrote:
> 
> * Marc de Graauw
> |
> | The TNC becomes optional, and can be switched on and off. Something like
> | this will happen:
> |
> | <topic id="t1">
> |   <baseName>
> |     <baseNameString merge="on">Mama Cass</baseNameString>
> |   </baseName>
> | </topic>
> |
> | Right?
> 
> That's what the Montréal meeting decided. Then we have to see what the
> national bodies (and other people who were not present) think.
> 
> Note that in this example the merge on/off instruction only applies to
> that particular base name. Other base names might have this value set
> to "off".

A note regarding RM-thinking here (as far as I understand it):

At the RM level there will only be *one* node that represents the concept of
the "name that has "Mama Cass" as a 'string value' (the name that
has all the "Mama Cass" <baseNametring> elements as subject indicators).
This node may then participate in topic-basename assertions (those that
trigger the TNC) and topic-name assertions (those that don't trigger the
TNC).

So, at the RM level one can't say 'this *particular* "Mama Cass" name',
there is only one because it is a subject in it's own right.



Jan




> 
> | I also see in the discussion below that it has been discussed what
> | happens when a merging TM and a to-be-merged TM specify different
> | values for the 'merge' attribute, but I cannot make out the outcome
> | of this discussion. What is it?
> 
> The outcome was that option 3.e. was chosen, which means that the
> example you gave above is correct. But since this only allows us to
> say what to do with each individual base name, there is no way for
> topic maps to conflict. So the conclusion to all that talk about
> conflicts was to choose a solution that did not allow for conflicts at
> all, thus simplifying the TNC solution.
> 
> | Also: is this Topic Map (going to be) valid?
> |
> | <topicMap>
> |
> |   <topic id="t1">
> |     <baseName>
> |       <baseNameString merge="on">Mama Cass</baseNameString>
> |     </baseName>
> |   </topic>
> |
> |   <topic id="t6">
> |     <baseName>
> |       <baseNameString merge="off">Mama Cass</baseNameString>
> |     </baseName>
> |   </topic>
> |
> | </topicMap>
> 
> It is perfectly valid, and it has two topics. (I.e., they don't
> merge.)
> 
> --
> Lars Marius Garshol, Ontopian         <URL: http://www.ontopia.net >
> ISO SC34/WG3, OASIS GeoLang TC        <URL: http://www.garshol.priv.no >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> sc34wg3 mailing list
> sc34wg3@isotopicmaps.org
> http://www.isotopicmaps.org/mailman/listinfo/sc34wg3

-- 
Jan Algermissen
Consultant & Programmer

Tel:   ++49 (0)40 89 700 511
       ++49 (0)177 283 1440
Fax:   ++49 (0)40 89 700 841 
Email: algermissen@acm.org
Web:   http://www.topicmapping.com