[sc34wg3] Removing added scope from <mergeMap>

[Steve Pepper]

* Kal Ahmed
|
| 21, 23, 19 and 42 are mathematically concepts that are not (normally)
| disputed 2+2 is always 4. Most topic maps consist of assertions that *can*
| be disputed and there are very real requirements for being able to
| distinguish what Party A asserts in their topic map and what Party B asserts
| in their topic map both pre- and post-merge.

I'm with you all the way on this.

| IMO this cannot be ignored by the topic map merging process and
| has to be supported both in the definition of the merging process...

I agree fully.

| ...and in the representation of a merge directive in XTM.

Here I would like you to explain why. It was Lars Marius and
Graham, editors and implementers, who came up with the idea that
added scope on <mergeMap> should be done away with. It was a bit
"last minute", so I would be interested to hear from one of their
peers, *why* you think this might not be such a good idea.

Steve