[sc34wg3] New TMCL slides: pinging LMG's intuition about role-type subjects

Dmitry db3000 at mac.com
Mon Nov 23 18:59:02 EST 2009

On 23-Nov-09, at 1:19 PM, Steve Newcomb wrote:

>> You're really raising the issue now of whether we add a rule to  
>> TMCL stating that the same association role type cannot be used in  
>> more than one association type. (Ironically, if we do we'll have to  
>> redo the entire TMCL ontology.)
> Seems like a high price, doesn't it? Of course I'm arguing that the  
> price should be paid, but it's easy for me to argue for improvement  
> because the existing investments in that ontology were not made by  
> me. (I personally would rather be correct than rich, but I recognize  
> that there are other arguably-valid attitudes about that kind of  
> question, and poverty has little to recommend it.)
> This seems like a pretty fundamental question to me. Is there no  
> other way forward? How important is one-subject-per-topic to the  
> community? How important is it that Topic Maps has a shared  
> understanding of the semantics of associations, and the semantics of  
> association types, as being relationships and kinds of  
> relationships, respectively? These things are very important to me,  
> but not necessarily important to others.

Alternative approach can be in different TMDM to TMRM mapping.

TMDM Association type + TMDM Association Role Type1 + TMDM Association  
Role Type2    ->    TMRM Association type

TMDM Association type + TMDM Association Role Type1    ->   TMRM  
Association Role Type 1

TMDM Association type + TMDM Association Role Type2   ->   TMRM  
Association Role Type 2

For example,

TMDM  level

transaction (
buyer: * ,
seller:  *,
value_from_buyer_to_seller: *,
value_from_seller_to_buyer: *

at TMRM level can look like this

: * ,
:  *,
: *,
: *

This approach allows to be 'user friendly' on TMDM level and strict at  
TMRM level.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.isotopicmaps.org/pipermail/sc34wg3/attachments/20091123/f5f2e59e/attachment-0001.htm>

More information about the sc34wg3 mailing list