[topicmapmail] Reification of topic map constructs in XTM 1.0 vs. XTM 2.0

[Lars Heuer]

Hi Alexander,

[...]
>>IMO the cleanest solution would be to drop both, if they exist for
>>reification purposes only.

> I'd rather keep the item identifier for the automated conversion as a 
> default option.

No problem.

[...]
> We will have to add this item identifier during the serialisation,
> because the deserialisation process described in the XTM 2.0 draft 
> explicitly states that an item identifier should be be created for the
> topic.

Just for the record: I meant the item identifier of the association,
not the item identifier of the topic. My proposal was to omit the item
identifier of the association iff it was just used to reify the
association. And to omit the subject identifier iff it was used to
reify a Topic Maps construct (the association in your example).

Best regards,
Lars
-- 
http://www.semagia.com
http://www.topicmaps.de/mailinglist/ German Topic Maps mailinglist