[sc34wg3] Pre-publication draft of XTM 1.1 CD

[Dmitry]

On Jan 29, 2004, at 3:52 AM, Lars Marius Garshol wrote:|
> | I guess this is an old issue. I am just wondering why in 4.16 one or
> | zero member element can have ID.
>
> You mean "why doesn't the RELAX-NG schema disallow IDs on the <member>
> elements when there's more than one <member> element in the same
> <association>"?
>

Actually, I am not sure why ID is allowed in case of one member and 
disallowed in case of several topics in member element.

> One answer is that nobody thought of it. :-)
>
> Another is that it would be a break in backwards compatibility with
> XTM 1.0, which I don't think is acceptable. Otherwise I think we
> should have done it.
>
>

I found also that in 5.16 a locator item is created if there is an ID 
and only one topic-member. It means that I can reify fact of being one 
member for a topic but I cannot reify fact of being member for a set of 
topics. Why do we have a special case for one member? It makes more 
sense, I think, to have ability to reify sets. I can use set 
reification for example to specify some properties of this set such as 
"full set", "partial set", "number of elements in set".  So I can 
represent such facts as:
- paper23 has three authors
- but...I know only two of them now
- set of authors for paper23 is partial now


Dmitry