[sc34wg3] occurrence - basename fuzzy boarder

[Nikita Ogievetsky]

Summarizing:

We now have means to scope subject indicators
if "unambiguous" occurrence classes are used to express them.

Now we can get closer to my RDF TM representation [1]
where I have two types of occurrence classes (RDF properties):
"subject indicator" & "subject constitutor"

Now it would seem that "subjectIdentity" is a syntactic sugar
for "unconstraint vocabulary".
This actually scares me.

[1] http://www.cogx.com/swglasses.html

--Nikita.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Bernard Vatant" <bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>
To: <sc34wg3@isotopicmaps.org>
Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 7:05 AM
Subject: [sc34wg3] occurrence - basename fuzzy boarder


> Some thoughts following up Baltimore brainstorming:
>
> Now that TNC is relaxed and typing of names is allowed, the (already
fuzzy) boarder
> between names and occurrences seems to fade away a little more. And well,
that's good news
> for those who have always considered this boarder to be a syntactic answer
to a
> non-question :)
> A quick exchange on topicmaps IRC channel yesterday about "occurrence
variants"
> http://www.ontopia.net/topicmaps/irc/irclog/2002-12-18.html triggered
further reflection
> on that.
>
> Let's say occurrences and basenames together form a class of "information
items". We can
> define at least two clear orthogonal subclasses - orthogonal to each
other, more clearly
> defined than, and orthogonal to, the fuzzy name-occurrence classification.
>
> 1. Identifier vs Non-identifier
> Some types of names (e.g. codes) will be used as unique identifiers, and
some will not.
> Some types of occurrences could also be used as unique identifiers (think
about biometric
> identifiers, e.g. fingerprints), and some should not.
> And it figures: where is the boarder between this name-occurrence
superclass and subject
> indicators for that matter?
>
> 2. Internal vs External
> There is more difference between an external occurrence of type e.g. "Home
Page" defined
> by a <resourceRef> link and an internal occurrence of type "Short
Description" defined by
> a <resourceData>, than between the same "Short Description" and some
basename of type
> "Long Name".
>
> Of course following this track would lead to something hardly compatible
with XTM 1.0
> syntax, but maybe compatible with the Reference Model. For SAM I don't
figure clearly.
>
> Bernard
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> Bernard Vatant
>
> Senior Consultant - Knowledge Engineering
> Mondeca - www.mondeca.com
>
> Chair - OASIS TM PubSubj Technical Committee
> www.oasis-open.org/committees/tm-pubsubj/
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sc34wg3 mailing list
> sc34wg3@isotopicmaps.org
> http://www.isotopicmaps.org/mailman/listinfo/sc34wg3
>
>