[topicmapmail] Contextualized Topic Maps.

[Thomas B. Passin]

Thomas Schwotzer wrote:

>> you really want is the ability to provide a context in which those
>> Topics play a role in an Association. And actually, Associations in
>> Topic Maps can be scoped. 
> 
> Really? As far as I know, I can scope roles in an assocation
> but not the association itself. Has it changed recently?
> 


No, it is the other way around.  You can scope the association but not 
the roles.  Just check the xtm 1.0 spec.

> Of course, I know that I can do whatever I want with a topic map
> application. Actually, I already do. My only point was that
> scopes are not sufficient to define any imaginable context types.
> I guess, you'd agree.
> 

Yes, it is always a question what a "context" is and how one should be 
represented.  But no matter what, a context must, it seems to me, have 
to do with relationships between a topic and ....what?  Whatever it is 
could presumably be represented by one or more topics or associations, 
and the original topic would be related to the context via associations, 
I would think.

When there is some agreement about the nature and definition of these 
kinds of context topics and associations, it might be time to think 
about turning them into PSIs.


Cheers,

Tom P