[sc34wg3] What do we mean by reification?

[Lars Marius Garshol]

* Steve Pepper
|
| This seems to be getting to the heart of the difference between the
| SAM and the RM. If "every subject is already (pre)reified" in the
| RM, but not in the SAM, perhaps the apparent inconsistency becomes
| acceptable?

* Jan Algermissen
| 
| The relationship between the RM and a Topic Map Model (SAM) is
| different than the above sentence implies:
| 
| The RM ensures that every subject THAT THE MODEL (SAM) DEFINES TO BE
| A SUBJECT is already prereified. It is *ENTIRELY* up to the SAM to
| say what the subjects are (= what 'users' of the SAM are enabled to
| 'talk about' ).

Jan, what does this have to do with the choice of the term
"representation", as opposed to "reification"? Also, I don't see any
contradiction between what you write and what Steve wrote.

-- 
Lars Marius Garshol, Ontopian         <URL: http://www.ontopia.net >
GSM: +47 98 21 55 50                  <URL: http://www.garshol.priv.no >