Re: Fwd: Re: TMRM: isa/sub - irreflexive relation vs. reflexive relation

Hi,

tmcl:topic-type isa tmcl:topic-type

Really is intended to say that the topic tmcl:topic-type isa tmcl:topic-type.

Its so that when we say:

tmcl:occurrenceType subtypeOf tmcl:topictype

and then

myont:age isa occurrenceType

And then try to validate TMCL against TMCL it works.

On 6 October 2011 00:08, Alexander Johannesen
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Hiya,
>
> I'm starting to think I'm missing something. For example,
> "tmcl:topic-type isa tmcl:topic-type", I'm assuming what is meant here
> is ;
>
>   The instance tmcl:topic-type is of the class tmcl:topic-type
>
> Isn't this poorly defined identifiers (naming instances the same as
> classes) rather than something we should allowing people to do? I can
> understand that some might think this a good idea (like always create
> a static default instance for every class, ala prototypes), but it
> sounds terrible to me. Could someone explain why even doing this is a
> good idea? It sounds like software engineering rather than human
> understanding and modelling ... :)
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Alex
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 8:23 AM, Lars Heuer <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On behalf of Quitnin.
>>
>> (sent from my local mail client)
>>
>>
>> This is a forwarded message
>>
>> From: Quintin Siebers <[email protected]>
>> To: Lars Heuer <[email protected]>
>> Date: Wednesday, October 5, 2011 9:56:36 PM
>> Subject: [topicmapmail] TMRM: isa/sub - irreflexive relation vs. reflexive relation
>>
>> ===8<==============Original message text===============
>>
>>
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Oct 5, 2011, at 11:05, Lars Heuer <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> but I wonder why
>>> stating "x isa x" is explicitly forbidden.
>>
>> Another place were we use this is when we define a meta ontology that describes topicmaps:
>>
>> k:topic-type isa k:topic-type
>>
>> Making x isa x forbidden would cause me great headaches because it would break my schema ontology to validate itself. This leads me to another question:
>>
>> Does TMCL not specify:
>> "tmcl:topic-type isa tmcl:topic-type"
>> ?
>>
>> http://www.isotopicmaps.org/tmcl/schema.ctm
>>
>> ===8<===========End of original message text===========
>> _______________________________________________
>> topicmapmail mailing list
>> topicmapmail-Zo64W7twoUFWk0Htik3J/[email protected]
>> http://www.infoloom.com/mailman/listinfo/topicmapmail
>>
>
>
>
> --
>  Project Wrangler, SOA, Information Alchemist, UX, RESTafarian, Topic Maps
> --- http://shelter.nu/blog/ ----------------------------------------------
> ------------------ http://www.google.com/profiles/alexander.johannesen ---
> _______________________________________________
> topicmapmail mailing list
> topicmapmail-Zo64W7twoUFWk0Htik3J/[email protected]
> http://www.infoloom.com/mailman/listinfo/topicmapmail
>



-- 
Graham Moore, Director, Networked Planet Limited
Editor XTM 1.0, ISO13250 (TopicMaps) -2,-3, TMCL
e: [email protected]
w: www.networkedplanet.com
t: +44 1865 811131
m: +47 90056479   (Norway)

Networked Planet Limited is registered in England and Wales, no. 5273377