[sc34wg3] Association items

[Jan Algermissen]

On Jun 9, 2005, at 5:15 AM, Nikita Ogievetsky wrote:

> Dear Patrick and all dislikers of unary associations,
>
> Could you please model this:
> I maintained a topic map that contained association between parents  
> that
> gave their genes material to a child (supposing I do not care about
> children, so I do not keep them in the topic map)

That sounds like an attribute of the parent 'subject'

> Then one day a guy comes in with an embryo in a tube.
> Or perhaps it was a prokaryote that asexually reproduced by binary  
> fission?
>
> In any case, do I have to throw my system away, and write a new one?
>
No, you just have to adapt the system to the changed domain  
semantics. Schema evolution is pretty common....

Jan


> What happens with the information in the mean time?
>
> Yes you can represent everything in 2+ associations.
> But sometimes you can not: if you have certain ontology to fit in  
> and if
> modifying ontology on the fly is not the luxury that you posses.
>
> Hope that everybody enjoys the summer (or winter).
>
> -Nikita
>
> ! -----Original Message-----
> ! From: sc34wg3-admin@isotopicmaps.org [mailto:sc34wg3-
> ! admin@isotopicmaps.org] On Behalf Of Patrick Durusau
> ! Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2005 8:00 PM
> ! To: sc34wg3@isotopicmaps.org
> ! Subject: [sc34wg3] Association items
> !
> ! This one was sent yesterday and was the first time I noticed that my
> ! posts weren't making it to the list. :-(
> !
> ! Greetings!
> !
> ! This is mainly directed at Lars and Graham but I thought others  
> might be
> ! interested in the question and any ensuing discussion.
> !
> ! I am trying to model the various parts of the TMDM as assertions  
> and in
> ! the course of re-reading the TMDM, I ran across the following at 5.7
> ! Association Items:
> !
> ! "An association is a representation of a relationship between one or
> ! more subjects."
> !
> ! I mined the SC34WG3 archives for prior discussion of this point and
> ! found Lars' post of April 18, 2003, subject line: Re: [sc34wg3]
> ! Questions on N0396 (2) one or more association memberships,  
> pointing out:
> !
> ! ***quote***
> ! This is a carry-over from HyTM and XTM., both of which allow unary
> ! associations. The rationale, I have been told, was that unary
> ! associations are essentially assertions about a single subject, such
> ! as:
> !
> ! is-inquisitive(jan : person)
> !
> ! SAM has ot have this because HyTM and XTM have it.
> ! ***/quote***
> !
> ! (For those of you with a historical interest, see Note 41 in ISO
> ! 13250:1999 for HyTM and 2.2.4 Association for XTM. BTW, for  
> newcomers to
> ! the community, "SAM" was the prior name for what has become the  
> TMDM.)
> !
> ! There is no question Lars is correct about HyTM and XTM, but I am  
> less
> ! certain that answers the question about how to model a "unary"
> ! association.
> !
> ! Note 41 (from ISO 13250) says: "Thus, the containing assoc  
> element can
> ! assert that a topic has one or more specific relationships to  
> itself."
> !
> ! Although it is represented in syntax as a "unary" association,  
> shouldn't
> ! it be modeled as an association with two roles, etc.?
> !
> ! This is not the only place where the issue comes up, as topic  
> name, for
> ! example, is mentioned as a specialized kind of occurrence (TMDM,  
> page
> ! 11) and it is later noted that an occurrence is a specialized  
> form of an
> ! association (TMDM, page 13).
> !
> ! NOTE: I am NOT suggesting any change in syntax, processing, etc.,  
> but am
> ! asking if the "unary" association in syntax should be modeled as  
> though
> ! it were an association with two (or more) roles, role players,  
> etc. Some
> ! parts of which are implied, for example with topic name if it is
> ! considered ultimately to be a form of an association (I take it the
> ! roles are implied even though the role players are known).
> !
> ! Hope everyone is having a great day!
> !
> ! Patrick
> !
> ! PS: For those of you who are interested, the example that Lars'  
> gives
> ! above:
> !
> ! is-inquisitive(jan : person)
> !
> ! Can be  seen  as  two roles: characteristic/person, with two role
> ! players: is-inquisitive/jan.
> !
> ! Suppose in the best tradition of English anyway, the role of
> ! characteristic is silent. ;-)
> !
> ! --
> ! Patrick Durusau
> ! Patrick@Durusau.net
> ! Chair, V1 - Text Processing: Office and Publishing Systems Interface
> ! Co-Editor, ISO 13250, Topic Maps -- Reference Model
> ! Member, Text Encoding Initiative Board of Directors, 2003-2005
> !
> ! Topic Maps: Human, not artificial, intelligence at work!
> !
> !
> ! _______________________________________________
> ! sc34wg3 mailing list
> ! sc34wg3@isotopicmaps.org
> ! http://www.isotopicmaps.org/mailman/listinfo/sc34wg3
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sc34wg3 mailing list
> sc34wg3@isotopicmaps.org
> http://www.isotopicmaps.org/mailman/listinfo/sc34wg3
>

________________________________________________________________________ 
____________________
Jan Algermissen, Consultant & Programmer                              
http://jalgermissen.com
Tugboat Consulting, 'Applying Web technology to enterprise IT'        
http://www.tugboat.de