Basename duplication ... ?
Michael Chapman <[email protected]> Thu, 24 Jun 2004 07:16:06 +0000
| Newsgroups | gmane.text.xml.xtm.tmql |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
I have a basic -though I hope not trivial / frequently answered- question. The question relates to TMs and not TMQL, but it has arisen in relation to what I feel is a fundamental point about TMQL(s). In trying to better express the latter, I did some research and found the following: "F.6.2 Topic name duplicate suppression "[If] basename B1 ... is equal to [basename B2] [in the same scope] [a] basename B3 is created which contains a base name equal to [basename B1] ... . All variants of B1 are added to B3. All variants of B2 are added to B3. ... B1 and B2 no longer exist." (ref.1) and "It is allowed in topic maps for different topics to have the same name[4], something that taxonomies and thesauri do not allow. In practice this is something that occurs all the time, and so it is important to support it. Many classification systems avoid duplicate names by including some dis- ambiguation in the name itself. For example, Paris the city and Paris the hero of Greek mythology may have been differentiated as 'Paris (France)' and 'Paris (Greek myth.)'. In topic maps this is not necessary, and the types, occurrences, and associations of the topics will generally distinguish them anyway." ([footnote 4.] "You may have heard of the "topic naming constraint", which is a rule in topic maps that only allows duplicate names in certain limited cases. This rule has now been removed from topic maps, so the statement is true.") (ref.2) So can one have two _different_ topics in the same (set of) topicmap(s) with the same basename? Apologies again for being off topic, but it has (obvious) relevance to querying. Michael Chapman Culoz, France. (1) "XML Topic Maps (XTM) 1.0." xtm1-20010806.html v 1.16 14:31:44 pepper at _"Informative"_ Annex F. I have only now (as I type) noticed that this Annex is _not_ normative. Even though the (presumably Normative) section section 3.10 in the body of the document requires merging "according to the _rules_ in Annex F" (emphasis added) and the Annex itself, declares (section F.1) "This annex describes the minimal requirements for a _conformant_ XTM processor. .. [a] processor is _required_ to ...." (emphases added). (2) "Metadata? Thesauri? Taxonomies? Topic Maps! Making sense of it all" Lars Marius Garshol www.ontopia.net/topicmaps/materials/tm-vs-thesauri.html ?undated