Re: Status of the Dublin Core to Topic Maps mapping?

Hi Andrew,

[...]
>> I don't say that TMDM is cooler than TMRM, but we shouldn't be too
>> unfair. ;)

> I wasn't trying to say one is cooler than the other
[...]

No, I haven't implied that. :)

[...]
> saying proxy1 is-reified-by proxy2 as opposed to having to modify
> each of the proxy instances to say that they all represent the same
> subject.

I see. Basically, your is-reified-by proxy seems to be the same as the
owl:sameAs property, right?

> Since this is beyond the scope of the TMRM and into the realm of
> what's specified by the TMDM legend, it just means that I can do it
> in my implementation using one mechanism and you (or anyone else)
> can do it in the TMDM the way you describe.  The actual amount of

A neat side effect of your approach: You can simply "unmerge" proxies
if you remove the is-reified-by relationship between two proxies while
unmerging topics is much more difficult (and often impossible). The
downside is the bigger amount of proxies an engine has to cope with.

[...]
> Agreed.  That's similar to what I do most of the time too, but I
> also have several types of normalization functions that are applied
> depending on the context in which the value is encountered so that I
> can *try* to generate stable proxy identifiers in a temporally
> independent manner and across parsing runs.
[...]

We're having the same set of problems :)


Best regards,
Lars
-- 
Semagia 
<http://www.semagia.com>

<http://www.topicmaps.de/mailinglist/> German Topic Maps mailing list
<http://tinytim.sourceforge.net/> Open Source Topic Maps engine
<http://mappa.semagia.com/> Mappa - Python Topic Maps engine