[topicmapmail] subject proxies and subject maps

[Patrick Durusau]

Lars,

Lars Heuer wrote:
> Hi Johannes,
>
>   
>> while thinking about how (and where) to implement a simple dereferencing
>> mechanism for proxies (label -> proxy) I came across the question if 
>> subject proxies can exist independently from any subject map (both 
>> according to TMRM), e.g. in an application (context).
>>     
>
> Well, a subject map is just a container for a finite set of proxies.
> If you want, you can interpret a lonely proxy as a subject map with one
> proxy. I think that's a valid interpretation. The 'bootstrapping'
> ontology (isa, ako) is missing, though. And the legend is also
> missing, if you don't provide a standard "noop" legend.
>
> But you cannot "travel" from a proxy to the containing subject map.
> Nobody forbids to implement such a feature, but the TMRM does not
> provide such a feature.
>
>   
Well, yes and no. True, the TMRM doesn't specify such a feature. But, 
using proxies you could certainly represent such a relationship if you 
chose to do so.

There are any number of such "features" that the TMRM did not specify. 
What would be the "best" choice for one set of proxies would be less 
than optimal for another set. Those choices are best left to legends so 
that users can choose those that best suit their needs.

Hope you are looking forward to a Happy New Year!

Patrick

-- 
Patrick Durusau
patrick at durusau.net
Chair, V1 - US TAG to JTC 1/SC 34
Convener, JTC 1/SC 34/WG 3 (Topic Maps)
Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300
Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps)