Re: [tinyTiM-discuss] tinyTiM and MIO

[Lars H. <he...@se...>]

Hi Stefan,

[...]
> but if i don't know the document IRI? just parsing a file from the web/p2p network.
> So i think, the first style is needed for this case.

I think the document IRI is overestimated. IMO it would be better if
the user has the possibility to provide an IRI which is used to
override the document IRI. The document IRI is "just" used to resolve
IRIs against. If the user wants stable IRIs, she should should use
(absolute) subject identifiers / locators.

If the document IRI is unknown or should be overridden, the user
simply sets the IRI which should be used to resolve IRIs against.

[...]
>> After that, the topic map "tm" would contain the content from the XTM
>> source and the LTM source.

> but what about clashes? is there a merging? when there is a merge,

Yes, of course, there is always merging, even if you read a single
topic map. No Topic Maps syntax mandates that the document contains a
merged topic map (well, CXTM is an exception, these topic maps are
always merged).

You have to look up topics all the time. If a topic is read and it is
equal to an existing topic, you merge them transparently; no user
interaction necessary.

And I'd do the same if the user imports serialized topic map into an
existing topic map. The user expects that merging is done, she cannot
assume that topics do not merge.

Best regards,
Lars
-- 
Semagia 
<http://www.semagia.com>