[sc34wg3] One subject per role typing topic
rho at devc.at
Mon Nov 9 06:02:08 EST 2009
On Mon, Nov 09, 2009 at 03:06:00AM +0100, Xuân Baldauf wrote:
> (Example 2)
> drive(driver: Paul, from: Amsterdam, to: Rotterdam)
> walk(walker: Paul, from: Amsterdam, to: Rotterdam)
> ride_bike(bike_rider: Paul, from: Amsterdam, to: Rotterdam)
> (Example 3)
> drive(driver: Paul, driving_from: Amsterdam, driving_to: Rotterdam)
> walk(walker: Paul, walking_from: Amsterdam, walking_to: Rotterdam)
> ride_bike(bike_rider: Paul, riding_bike_from: Amsterdam,
> riding_bike_to: Rotterdam)
> So, it seems, the question here is:
> 1. whether the role type topic on its own (e.g. the "who" topic)
> already disambiguates the role, or
> 2. whether the role type topic _together_ with the association type
> topic only disambiguates the role.
> Is this the correct question?
Maybe not. I would ask:
"Is the combination of roletypes sufficiently discriminant to
characterize the relationship?"
"is the association type _just a name_ for the combination of
roletypes?". I.e. assoctypes are a redundant information (for the
In that light, Example 2 would be proper modelling. And that ...
> As "drive", "walk" and "ride_balk" are all kinds of "locomotion", and
> as, for locomotion, the role types "from" and "to" are sufficiently well
> defined, I do not see (from a software-engineering "reuse what you can
> reuse" point of view) why it is wrong to plainly re-use the "from" and
> "to" role type topics.
... would also have room for reuse.
More information about the sc34wg3