[sc34wg3] Removing added scope from <mergeMap>

[Geir Ove Grønmo]

On 1/14/06, Kal Ahmed <kal@techquila.com> wrote:
> One possible scenario:
>
> The provider of the topic map has used a mergeMap and not done the merge
> prior to sending the XTM because they have no idea (at the time of
> publication) what the content of the referenced map will be. For example,
> the referenced topic map might be generated by a service and updated on a
> regular basis and they want the recipient to do the merge when the XTM fi=
le
> is received.
>
> As it stands, with no added themes on the mergeMap directive, there is no
> *standard* way for the publisher to express the intent that the other top=
ic
> map data needs to be scoped. As we know scoping can be used both for
> tracking provenance and for preventing unwanted merges.
>
> If publishers have no way to include third-party topic map files safely w=
ith
> a record of provenance, I think that mergeMap will be pretty much restric=
ted
> to single-author use cases and drastically reduced in power.
>
> So in a phrase: "Safe topic map aggregation".

XTM as it stands today (XTM 1.0) does not give you "safe
aggregation". It is pretty easy to cause all kinds of damage to the
"mother" topic map if the "included" topic map wants to do so -- even
with added scope on <mergeMap>.

The only way that "safe aggregation" can happen is if the software
provides that kind of support.

--
Geir O.