[sc34wg3] TM Data Model issue: assoc-role-player-type

Kal Ahmed sc34wg3@isotopicmaps.org
03 Nov 2003 14:46:47 +0000

On Mon, 2003-11-03 at 14:24, Steve Pepper wrote:
> * Geir Ove Grønmo
> | * Kal Ahmed
> | | I think it makes more sense to require the [role playing topic] property
> | | to be non-null.
> | |
> | | If you want to say that  the player is unknown, then you should be
> | | required to create a topic to represent the "unknown" entity...
> |
> | I like this solution: mandatory role types and "blank" topics for
> | "missing" role player references.
> This does have a downside, though: You would have to create a topic
> for *every* '"unknown" entity' in the topic map -- you couldn't use
> the same topic for each one, otherwise you would get undesired
> merging.

Thats true...I suppose that if you don't know what the enities are
though, you don't know that they are the same so you probably should be
forced to create separate topics for them.

I guess that you are thinking you could create a topic that represents
the subject "Unknown Entity" - but then your assertions would not be
strictly true, because you would be asserting that there was one unknown
entity playing all those roles. Or am I missing a torturous subject
definition here - is there some way to create a single topic that
represents an unkown entity ? For exampl, lets say you have two "murder"
associations in which the players of the victim role are known but the
players of the perpetrator role are not. If you use a single topic to
play the perpetrator role in both associations, what is the subject that
this topic represents ?



> -- 
> Kal Ahmed, Techquila
> Standards-based Information Management
> e: kal@techquila.com
> w: www.techquila.com
> p: +44 7968 529531