Re: TMQL - Proposal: Removal of reifier axis
Patrick Durusau <patrick-Q/[email protected]> Sat, 30 Apr 2011 06:47:53 -0400
| Newsgroups | gmane.text.xml.xtm.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Lars, On 4/30/2011 6:27 AM, Lars Heuer wrote: > Hi Patrick, > > [...] >>> If topic T reifies association A and T is an instance of TT. Is A an >>> instance of TT? >>> >> Well, starting from the TMDM, we know that type/instance is *not* >> transitive: > I think this has nothing to do with the question if type-instance > relationships are transitive or not, but with the question what > "reification" implies. > Possibly, possibly. I mentioned the transitive issue because my reading of the TMDM is that all type/instance is directly stated, that is it is never implied. But your next point, is a reified construct interchangeable with its reifier? maybe a different question. > If reification implies that A and T can be used interchangeable (since > A has become an explicit subject represented by T), the answer if A is > an instance of TT should be "yes". Why should reification (within a > topic map) be treated differently from our other topic > represents/reifies subject X mechanisms (via subject > identifier/locator)? > > We accept that an IRI becomes magically a topic/subject and that we > can make statements like > > <http://psi.example.org/Bremen> isa onto:city > > but if we reify something within a topic map, an extra step is needed > and A is not an instance of TT if T reifies A and T is an instance of > TT. > > Maybe I misunderstood reification, but in my understanding A should be > an instance of TT iff T reifies A and T is an instance of TT. > Your understanding may be correct, but that position isn't explicit in the TMDM, at least not how I am reading it. > [...] >>> That is, if B is an instance of the type A, and C is an instance of >>> the type B, it does not follow that C is an instance of A. >> If you consider reification to be a form of association, then I think a >> following clause from the TMDM clears this up: > [...] > > Yes, if reification is interpreted as an association and we're not > able to reify something directly, A wouldn't be an instance of TT. > Hope you are having a great weekend! Patrick PS: About to drop off-line for a bit but will catch up when I return. > Best regards, > Lars -- Patrick Durusau patrick-Q/[email protected] Chair, V1 - US TAG to JTC 1/SC 34 Convener, JTC 1/SC 34/WG 3 (Topic Maps) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps) Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau