[sc34wg3] Association items

[Lars Marius Garshol]

* Murray Altheim
|
| I realize that Lars Marius has argued that association type (along
| with other things) should not be optional in XTM, whereas I would
| suggest that XTM be left alone and push this kind of thing into a
| proper constraint language operating at a higher schema level -- the
| XTM DTD is really only meant to express syntax-level constraints.

What we agreed in Amsterdam (this year) was to leave XTM alone, but to
require an association type in TMDM. However, TMDM will define a PSI
for untyped associations that is inserted when no explicit type is
given. Thus we avoid the ugliness of association.[type] sometimes
being null, yet we keep backwards compatibility.

The implication is that we consider all untyped associations to have
the same type, but this seems fair.

Anyone wanting to disallow such associations should be able to do so
by means of TMCL.

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