[sc34wg3] Questions on N0396: (15) [value] vs [resource] property on occurrence

[Jan Algermissen]

Graham Moore wrote:
> 
> Hi Jan,
> 
> I would say that the intent of resource data is to say that its location is
> 'in the model' and explicitly not elsewhere. If you want to have what you
> ask for then just keep it as a Locator to the content in the XTM file and
> you can do the processing.
> 
> Further, considering that the majority of TM software will be interfaced via
> APIs and Query languages this notaion of where did a piece of 'internal data
> come from' doesnt make sense to me. We would end up with either ambiguous
> meaning or nothing at all.

All I tried to say is this:

Occurrences relate information resources to subjects. These information resources
can have addresses. If the same information resource is 'used' more than once in
a topic map I'd like to be able to provide the user with that information. If
I throw the locator of <resourceData> resources away, I loose that ability
in some cases. Since it does not hurt to keep the locator, why takle power
away from topic maps. What is the purpose?

> 
> What would the values of the Locator be if from an API or some other
> TopicMap creation method I assign resource data to an occurrence - what
> should the locator be?

Well, if there is no locator, fine with me. I just don't want to throw
information away.
> 
> The model drives the serialisation, the idea of a document and the
> de-serialisation driving the semantics of a model isn't right.

I agree. Syntax (in the DTD sense) must not drive any decision made in the
model.

But we have to consider issues that arise from transfering topic maps
via syntax.

Jan
> gra
> 
> --------------------
> 
> Graham Moore, Ontopian               <URL: http://www.ontopia.net >
> GSM: +44 (0) 7769658611             moore@ontopia.net
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jan Algermissen" <algermissen@acm.org>
> To: <sc34wg3@isotopicmaps.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2003 7:50 PM
> Subject: [sc34wg3] Questions on N0396: (15) [value] vs [resource] property
> on occurrence
> 
> > Lars, Graham--
> >
> > Section 3.7 defines the [value] property on occurrence items to
> > be
> >
> > "A string, or null. The string, if present, is the information
> >  resource the occurrence connects with the subject."
> >
> > and the [resource] property to be
> >
> > "A locator item, or null. The locator, if set, is a reference to
> >  the information resource the occurrence connects with the subject."
> >
> > The value/resource exclusion constraint says that exactly one of the
> > properties must contain null.
> >
> > At least in XTM, the information resource that is the content of
> > a <resourceData> element is addressable and so it would make
> > sense to me, if N0396 would allow me to have a value on the [value]
> > property and the [resource] property at the same time. This would
> > enable me to record the address that addresses the value if I need to
> > do so (I propably address the <resourceData> in some other context
> > such a from within <subjectIdentity> and would like to keep track of
> > the fact that the value of the occurrence is the same information
> > resource)
> >
> > Why should an application/user be prohibited from doing so?
> >
> > Jan
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jan Algermissen                           http://www.topicmapping.com
> > Consultant & Programmer                   http://www.gooseworks.org
> > _______________________________________________
> > sc34wg3 mailing list
> > sc34wg3@isotopicmaps.org
> > http://www.isotopicmaps.org/mailman/listinfo/sc34wg3
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> sc34wg3 mailing list
> sc34wg3@isotopicmaps.org
> http://www.isotopicmaps.org/mailman/listinfo/sc34wg3

-- 
Jan Algermissen                           http://www.topicmapping.com
Consultant & Programmer	                  http://www.gooseworks.org