[topicmapmail] Default occurrence type in TMDM

[Lars Marius Garshol]

* Robert Cerny
>
> [(1) create the default occurrence type PSI yourself]
>
> (1) is what I do right now.

Fair enough.

> (2) is unclear, because it is not an untyped occurrence when the  
> type is a topic which reifies the subject "The concept of occurrence".

Well, it's untyped in the sense that you know nothing more about the  
nature of the relationship between the topic and the information  
resource than what you are told by the fact of their being connecting  
by an occurrence. That seems to me to be what an "untyped occurrence"  
really ought to be, since if the occurrence is not typed, how would  
you know what the relationship is, specifically?

> The question is whether "http://www.topicmaps.org/xtm/1.0/ 
> core.xtm#occurrence" and "tm:occurrence-type" are PSIs for the same  
> subject?

What's tm:occurrence-type? Sorry to be difficult, but I can think of  
several possible candidates.

> I just would prefer something to lean on, even if it is not a 100%  
> and it might give in a little bit, than building something myself.  
> So i rather have a complete set of stable PSIs (like in 2005-07-13)  
> without the semantics between the subjects formalized, than not  
> being able to refer to them at all. But i do understand that this  
> is kind of dangerous.

Yeah. I'm afraid it's not really very tempting to put something of  
this nature in an ISO standard and then watch it give, and with our  
current state of knowledge it might give more than a little bit... :)

> By the way, when reading [1] again in the light of the new  
> information you provided, many things cleared up and i was much  
> happier reading it the second time :-)

Good! :)

--
Lars Marius Garshol, Ontopian               http://www.ontopia.net
+47 98 21 55 50                             http://www.garshol.priv.no