[sc34wg3] Question on TNC / Montreal minutes

Lars Marius Garshol sc34wg3@isotopicmaps.org
05 Sep 2002 08:43:20 +0200

* Marc de Graauw
| The TNC becomes optional, and can be switched on and off. Something like
| this will happen:
| <topic id=3D"t1">
|   <baseName>
|     <baseNameString merge=3D"on">Mama Cass</baseNameString>
|   </baseName>
| </topic>
| Right?

That's what the Montr=E9al meeting decided. Then we have to see what the
national bodies (and other people who were not present) think.

Note that in this example the merge on/off instruction only applies to
that particular base name. Other base names might have this value set
to "off".
| I also see in the discussion below that it has been discussed what
| happens when a merging TM and a to-be-merged TM specify different
| values for the 'merge' attribute, but I cannot make out the outcome
| of this discussion. What is it?

The outcome was that option 3.e. was chosen, which means that the
example you gave above is correct. But since this only allows us to
say what to do with each individual base name, there is no way for
topic maps to conflict. So the conclusion to all that talk about
conflicts was to choose a solution that did not allow for conflicts at
all, thus simplifying the TNC solution.
| Also: is this Topic Map (going to be) valid?
| <topicMap>
|   <topic id=3D"t1">
|     <baseName>
|       <baseNameString merge=3D"on">Mama Cass</baseNameString>
|     </baseName>
|   </topic>
|   <topic id=3D"t6">
|     <baseName>
|       <baseNameString merge=3D"off">Mama Cass</baseNameString>
|     </baseName>
|   </topic>
| </topicMap>

It is perfectly valid, and it has two topics. (I.e., they don't

Lars Marius Garshol, Ontopian         <URL: http://www.ontopia.net >
ISO SC34/WG3, OASIS GeoLang TC        <URL: http://www.garshol.priv.no >