Menu
▾
▴
tinytim-discuss — Discussions relating to tinyTiM
You can subscribe to this list here.
| 2008 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
(30) |
May
(4) |
Jun
(19) |
Jul
(36) |
Aug
(21) |
Sep
(10) |
Oct
(18) |
Nov
(43) |
Dec
(7) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2009 |
Jan
(5) |
Feb
(18) |
Mar
(6) |
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
(6) |
Jul
(21) |
Aug
(47) |
Sep
(3) |
Oct
|
Nov
(5) |
Dec
|
| 2010 |
Jan
(8) |
Feb
|
Mar
(5) |
Apr
(2) |
May
|
Jun
(14) |
Jul
(2) |
Aug
|
Sep
(4) |
Oct
(4) |
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2011 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
(1) |
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
(4) |
Nov
|
Dec
|
|
From: Lars H. <he...@se...> - 2010-03-22 14:46:02
|
Hi Hannes, [...] > I would extend the build script if nobody disagrees. Go ahead :) Best regards, Lars -- Semagia <http://www.semagia.com> |
|
From: Hannes N. <h.n...@go...> - 2010-03-22 14:37:07
|
Hi, I think the voc package should be exported, so the locator can be used in applications. I would extend the build script if nobody disagrees. regards Hannes -- Onotoa - Simply create your Topic Maps schemas. Web: http://onotoa.topicmapslab.de User Group: http://groups.google.com/group/onotoa Code: http://code.google.com/p/onotoa/ http://www.topicmapslab.de/people/Hannes_Niederhausen |
|
From: Lars H. <he...@se...> - 2010-03-19 15:04:10
|
Hi all,
I released the final ("This is it") version of tinyTiM 2.0.0. This
version is compatible to TMAPI 2.0.x.
Changes as follows:
* Updated TMAPI to 2.0.2 (kept compatibility to 2.0 and 2.0.1)
* Fixed LocatorImpl (the impl. of "equals" was different
from the TMAPI 2.0 specs) reported by Uta Schulze
* tinyTiM is usable as an OSGi bundle
* Added support to convert XTM 1.0 class-instance relationships
to TMDM type-instance relationships
* Added support to convert XTM 1.0 PSIs to TMDM PSIs
* Moved to Ontopia's Compact(Hash|Identity)Set instead relying
on Java's default implementations
* Removed support for trove's collections
* Bug #2926983 -- Merging of associations fails reported by Sven Krosse
You can download tinyTiM from <http://tinytim.sourceforge.net> and
<https://sourceforge.net/projects/tinytim/files/>
Best regards,
Lars
--
Semagia
<http://www.semagia.com>
|
|
From: Markus U. <mar...@gm...> - 2010-03-07 22:45:54
|
Hi, I'm currently still using tinyTiM MIO for both the TMAPI1 and TMAPI2 backend, so I could do with some hints :) -- especially because I reckon there are still some 'legacy' applications around which use the old API (i.e., the more hints available how to migrate from outdated/unmaintained libraries the better)... Ad astra, Markus Lars Heuer wrote: > Hi all, > > While I planned to release a new version of tinyTiM last week, I'll > wait for the approval of TMAPI 2.0.1 before I release tinyTiM. > > The question is: What should happen to tinyTiM MIO? AFAIK, one of the > main users, the University of Leipzig, moved already to org.tmapix.io > and implemented their own CTM writer, and I don't use tinyTiM MIO > neither. > > Is someone out there using tinyTiM MIO or can I simply let it die > without providing any hints how to convert existing applications to > TMAPIX? > > Best regards, > Lars |
|
From: Lars H. <he...@se...> - 2010-03-07 21:10:19
|
Hi all, While I planned to release a new version of tinyTiM last week, I'll wait for the approval of TMAPI 2.0.1 before I release tinyTiM. The question is: What should happen to tinyTiM MIO? AFAIK, one of the main users, the University of Leipzig, moved already to org.tmapix.io and implemented their own CTM writer, and I don't use tinyTiM MIO neither. Is someone out there using tinyTiM MIO or can I simply let it die without providing any hints how to convert existing applications to TMAPIX? Best regards, Lars -- Semagia <http://www.semagia.com/> |
|
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2010-01-13 16:13:14
|
Bugs item #2895215, was opened at 2009-11-10 15:30 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by lheuer You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=631664&aid=2895215&group_id=102341 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Core Group: tinyTiM 2.x >Status: Closed >Resolution: Invalid Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: equals() in ConstructImpl.java does not compare the Id Initial Comment: I just realised that equals() compare two object using "this == obj" and does not compare the Ids of the constructs (Ontopia does it, though). Is this done by intention? If not, could this be fixed, please? Uta (Topic Maps Lab) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Lars Heuer (lheuer) Date: 2010-01-13 17:13 Message: Comparing the identity is now in TMAPI's core ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=631664&aid=2895215&group_id=102341 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2010-01-13 14:58:08
|
Bugs item #2931353, was opened at 2010-01-13 14:38 Message generated for change (Settings changed) made by lheuer You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=631664&aid=2931353&group_id=102341 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Core Group: tinyTiM 2.x >Status: Closed >Resolution: Fixed Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Lars Heuer (lheuer) Assigned to: Lars Heuer (lheuer) Summary: Apply Ontopia's CompactHashSet changes Initial Comment: Apply the changes made here: http://code.google.com/p/ontopia/source/detail?r=807 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Lars Heuer (lheuer) Date: 2010-01-13 15:58 Message: Fixed in rev. 363 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=631664&aid=2931353&group_id=102341 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2010-01-13 13:38:41
|
Bugs item #2931353, was opened at 2010-01-13 14:38 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by lheuer You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=631664&aid=2931353&group_id=102341 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Core Group: tinyTiM 2.x Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Lars Heuer (lheuer) Assigned to: Lars Heuer (lheuer) Summary: Apply Ontopia's CompactHashSet changes Initial Comment: Apply the changes made here: http://code.google.com/p/ontopia/source/detail?r=807 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=631664&aid=2931353&group_id=102341 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2010-01-11 14:55:35
|
Bugs item #2926983, was opened at 2010-01-06 17:15 Message generated for change (Settings changed) made by lheuer You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=631664&aid=2926983&group_id=102341 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: tinyTiM 2.x Status: Open >Resolution: Fixed Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Merging of associations failed Initial Comment: if two topic maps are merge on demand by calling the method Topic.mergeIn, it fails if there are an association type in both topic maps with a merged type ( the same type ). tinyTim throws an ModelConstraint Exception: Exception in thread "main" org.tmapi.core.ModelConstraintException: All constructs must belong to the same topic map at org.tinytim.internal.utils.Check._reportModelConstraintViolation(Unknown Source) at org.tinytim.internal.utils.Check._sameTopicMap(Unknown Source) at org.tinytim.internal.utils.Check.sameTopicMap(Unknown Source) at org.tinytim.core.MemoryTopicMap.createAssociation(Unknown Source) at org.tinytim.core.MemoryTopicMap.createAssociation(Unknown Source) at TinyTimMergeTest.main(TinyTimMergeTest.java:54) And because of the fact that I try to merge, the associations don't belong to the same topic map. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Lars Heuer (lheuer) Date: 2010-01-11 13:42 Message: Fixed in rev. 362 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: https://www.google.com/accounts () Date: 2010-01-07 09:25 Message: Oh, this was a mistake, the attached file should not be empty. This is the contained code: TopicMapSystem topicMapSystem = TopicMapSystemFactory.newInstance() .newTopicMapSystem(); TopicMap topicMapA = topicMapSystem.createTopicMap("http://a"); TopicMap topicMapB = topicMapSystem.createTopicMap("http://b"); Topic typeA = topicMapA.createTopic(); typeA.addItemIdentifier(topicMapA.createLocator("http://type")); Topic roleA = topicMapA.createTopic(); roleA.addItemIdentifier(topicMapA.createLocator("http://role")); Topic playerA = topicMapA.createTopic(); playerA.addItemIdentifier(topicMapA.createLocator("http://player")); Association associationA = topicMapA.createAssociation(typeA, new Topic[0]); associationA.createRole(roleA, playerA); Topic typeB = topicMapB.createTopic(); typeB.addItemIdentifier(topicMapB.createLocator("http://type")); Topic roleB = topicMapB.createTopic(); roleB.addItemIdentifier(topicMapB.createLocator("http://role")); Topic playerB = topicMapB.createTopic(); playerB.addItemIdentifier(topicMapB.createLocator("http://player")); Association associationB = topicMapB.createAssociation(typeB, new Topic[0]); associationB.createRole(roleB, playerB); //THIS METHOD THROWS AN EXCEPTION topicMapA.mergeIn(topicMapB); ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Lars Heuer (lheuer) Date: 2010-01-06 19:19 Message: I am confused. * The attached file does not do anything, it just declares a main function * Topics from different topic maps cannot be merged. As tinyTiM says correctly: It's a model constraint violation since "All constructs must belong to the same topic map". * TopicMap.mergeIn(otherTopicMap) should work Maybe you can provide more details? Are you trying to do the following: topicA = tmA.createTopic(); topicB = tmB.createTopic(); topicA.mergeIn(topicB); ? If so, tinyTiM's behaviour is correct. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=631664&aid=2926983&group_id=102341 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2010-01-11 12:46:01
|
Bugs item #2926983, was opened at 2010-01-06 17:15 Message generated for change (Settings changed) made by lheuer You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=631664&aid=2926983&group_id=102341 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: tinyTiM 2.x >Status: Closed Resolution: Fixed Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Merging of associations failed Initial Comment: if two topic maps are merge on demand by calling the method Topic.mergeIn, it fails if there are an association type in both topic maps with a merged type ( the same type ). tinyTim throws an ModelConstraint Exception: Exception in thread "main" org.tmapi.core.ModelConstraintException: All constructs must belong to the same topic map at org.tinytim.internal.utils.Check._reportModelConstraintViolation(Unknown Source) at org.tinytim.internal.utils.Check._sameTopicMap(Unknown Source) at org.tinytim.internal.utils.Check.sameTopicMap(Unknown Source) at org.tinytim.core.MemoryTopicMap.createAssociation(Unknown Source) at org.tinytim.core.MemoryTopicMap.createAssociation(Unknown Source) at TinyTimMergeTest.main(TinyTimMergeTest.java:54) And because of the fact that I try to merge, the associations don't belong to the same topic map. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Lars Heuer (lheuer) Date: 2010-01-11 13:46 Message: Forgot to close this bug. Sourceforge sucks ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Lars Heuer (lheuer) Date: 2010-01-11 13:42 Message: Fixed in rev. 362 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: https://www.google.com/accounts () Date: 2010-01-07 09:25 Message: Oh, this was a mistake, the attached file should not be empty. This is the contained code: TopicMapSystem topicMapSystem = TopicMapSystemFactory.newInstance() .newTopicMapSystem(); TopicMap topicMapA = topicMapSystem.createTopicMap("http://a"); TopicMap topicMapB = topicMapSystem.createTopicMap("http://b"); Topic typeA = topicMapA.createTopic(); typeA.addItemIdentifier(topicMapA.createLocator("http://type")); Topic roleA = topicMapA.createTopic(); roleA.addItemIdentifier(topicMapA.createLocator("http://role")); Topic playerA = topicMapA.createTopic(); playerA.addItemIdentifier(topicMapA.createLocator("http://player")); Association associationA = topicMapA.createAssociation(typeA, new Topic[0]); associationA.createRole(roleA, playerA); Topic typeB = topicMapB.createTopic(); typeB.addItemIdentifier(topicMapB.createLocator("http://type")); Topic roleB = topicMapB.createTopic(); roleB.addItemIdentifier(topicMapB.createLocator("http://role")); Topic playerB = topicMapB.createTopic(); playerB.addItemIdentifier(topicMapB.createLocator("http://player")); Association associationB = topicMapB.createAssociation(typeB, new Topic[0]); associationB.createRole(roleB, playerB); //THIS METHOD THROWS AN EXCEPTION topicMapA.mergeIn(topicMapB); ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Lars Heuer (lheuer) Date: 2010-01-06 19:19 Message: I am confused. * The attached file does not do anything, it just declares a main function * Topics from different topic maps cannot be merged. As tinyTiM says correctly: It's a model constraint violation since "All constructs must belong to the same topic map". * TopicMap.mergeIn(otherTopicMap) should work Maybe you can provide more details? Are you trying to do the following: topicA = tmA.createTopic(); topicB = tmB.createTopic(); topicA.mergeIn(topicB); ? If so, tinyTiM's behaviour is correct. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=631664&aid=2926983&group_id=102341 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2010-01-07 08:25:33
|
Bugs item #2926983, was opened at 2010-01-06 16:15 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=631664&aid=2926983&group_id=102341 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: tinyTiM 2.x Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Merging of associations failed Initial Comment: if two topic maps are merge on demand by calling the method Topic.mergeIn, it fails if there are an association type in both topic maps with a merged type ( the same type ). tinyTim throws an ModelConstraint Exception: Exception in thread "main" org.tmapi.core.ModelConstraintException: All constructs must belong to the same topic map at org.tinytim.internal.utils.Check._reportModelConstraintViolation(Unknown Source) at org.tinytim.internal.utils.Check._sameTopicMap(Unknown Source) at org.tinytim.internal.utils.Check.sameTopicMap(Unknown Source) at org.tinytim.core.MemoryTopicMap.createAssociation(Unknown Source) at org.tinytim.core.MemoryTopicMap.createAssociation(Unknown Source) at TinyTimMergeTest.main(TinyTimMergeTest.java:54) And because of the fact that I try to merge, the associations don't belong to the same topic map. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: https://www.google.com/accounts () Date: 2010-01-07 08:25 Message: Oh, this was a mistake, the attached file should not be empty. This is the contained code: TopicMapSystem topicMapSystem = TopicMapSystemFactory.newInstance() .newTopicMapSystem(); TopicMap topicMapA = topicMapSystem.createTopicMap("http://a"); TopicMap topicMapB = topicMapSystem.createTopicMap("http://b"); Topic typeA = topicMapA.createTopic(); typeA.addItemIdentifier(topicMapA.createLocator("http://type")); Topic roleA = topicMapA.createTopic(); roleA.addItemIdentifier(topicMapA.createLocator("http://role")); Topic playerA = topicMapA.createTopic(); playerA.addItemIdentifier(topicMapA.createLocator("http://player")); Association associationA = topicMapA.createAssociation(typeA, new Topic[0]); associationA.createRole(roleA, playerA); Topic typeB = topicMapB.createTopic(); typeB.addItemIdentifier(topicMapB.createLocator("http://type")); Topic roleB = topicMapB.createTopic(); roleB.addItemIdentifier(topicMapB.createLocator("http://role")); Topic playerB = topicMapB.createTopic(); playerB.addItemIdentifier(topicMapB.createLocator("http://player")); Association associationB = topicMapB.createAssociation(typeB, new Topic[0]); associationB.createRole(roleB, playerB); //THIS METHOD THROWS AN EXCEPTION topicMapA.mergeIn(topicMapB); ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Lars Heuer (lheuer) Date: 2010-01-06 18:19 Message: I am confused. * The attached file does not do anything, it just declares a main function * Topics from different topic maps cannot be merged. As tinyTiM says correctly: It's a model constraint violation since "All constructs must belong to the same topic map". * TopicMap.mergeIn(otherTopicMap) should work Maybe you can provide more details? Are you trying to do the following: topicA = tmA.createTopic(); topicB = tmB.createTopic(); topicA.mergeIn(topicB); ? If so, tinyTiM's behaviour is correct. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=631664&aid=2926983&group_id=102341 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2010-01-06 18:19:42
|
Bugs item #2926983, was opened at 2010-01-06 17:15 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by lheuer You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=631664&aid=2926983&group_id=102341 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: tinyTiM 2.x Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Merging of associations failed Initial Comment: if two topic maps are merge on demand by calling the method Topic.mergeIn, it fails if there are an association type in both topic maps with a merged type ( the same type ). tinyTim throws an ModelConstraint Exception: Exception in thread "main" org.tmapi.core.ModelConstraintException: All constructs must belong to the same topic map at org.tinytim.internal.utils.Check._reportModelConstraintViolation(Unknown Source) at org.tinytim.internal.utils.Check._sameTopicMap(Unknown Source) at org.tinytim.internal.utils.Check.sameTopicMap(Unknown Source) at org.tinytim.core.MemoryTopicMap.createAssociation(Unknown Source) at org.tinytim.core.MemoryTopicMap.createAssociation(Unknown Source) at TinyTimMergeTest.main(TinyTimMergeTest.java:54) And because of the fact that I try to merge, the associations don't belong to the same topic map. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Lars Heuer (lheuer) Date: 2010-01-06 19:19 Message: I am confused. * The attached file does not do anything, it just declares a main function * Topics from different topic maps cannot be merged. As tinyTiM says correctly: It's a model constraint violation since "All constructs must belong to the same topic map". * TopicMap.mergeIn(otherTopicMap) should work Maybe you can provide more details? Are you trying to do the following: topicA = tmA.createTopic(); topicB = tmB.createTopic(); topicA.mergeIn(topicB); ? If so, tinyTiM's behaviour is correct. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=631664&aid=2926983&group_id=102341 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2010-01-06 16:15:01
|
Bugs item #2926983, was opened at 2010-01-06 16:15 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by nobody You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=631664&aid=2926983&group_id=102341 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: tinyTiM 2.x Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Merging of associations failed Initial Comment: if two topic maps are merge on demand by calling the method Topic.mergeIn, it fails if there are an association type in both topic maps with a merged type ( the same type ). tinyTim throws an ModelConstraint Exception: Exception in thread "main" org.tmapi.core.ModelConstraintException: All constructs must belong to the same topic map at org.tinytim.internal.utils.Check._reportModelConstraintViolation(Unknown Source) at org.tinytim.internal.utils.Check._sameTopicMap(Unknown Source) at org.tinytim.internal.utils.Check.sameTopicMap(Unknown Source) at org.tinytim.core.MemoryTopicMap.createAssociation(Unknown Source) at org.tinytim.core.MemoryTopicMap.createAssociation(Unknown Source) at TinyTimMergeTest.main(TinyTimMergeTest.java:54) And because of the fact that I try to merge, the associations don't belong to the same topic map. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=631664&aid=2926983&group_id=102341 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2009-11-10 14:30:11
|
Bugs item #2895215, was opened at 2009-11-10 14:30 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by nobody You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=631664&aid=2895215&group_id=102341 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Core Group: tinyTiM 2.x Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: equals() in ConstructImpl.java does not compare the Id Initial Comment: I just realised that equals() compare two object using "this == obj" and does not compare the Ids of the constructs (Ontopia does it, though). Is this done by intention? If not, could this be fixed, please? Uta (Topic Maps Lab) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=631664&aid=2895215&group_id=102341 |
|
From: Lars H. <he...@se...> - 2009-11-03 14:14:26
|
Hi Christian, [...] > The actual problem is that I try to merge two topic maps which I deserialize > from different files, in my case an topic map schema and a topic map which I > want to verify according to that schema. The exception is thrown in the > mergeIn method of the topic map. I assume that the engine tries to merge two > topics by creating a third one which gets all properties of one of those > topics, which cases the IdentityConstraintException to be thrown. Aha! :) tinyTiM should never create a 3rd topic, but anyway, we may have a problem. Is it possible provide the topic maps (maybe as private mail) or to provide more information? * Which deserializers do you use? (CTM, XTM, XTM 1.0, XTM 2.0 ...) * From which project do you use the deserializers (tinyTiM, TMAPIX)? * Which version? Best regards, Lars -- Semagia <http://www.semagia.com> |
|
From: Christian H. <ha...@in...> - 2009-11-03 14:03:41
|
Am Dienstag 03 November 2009 14:53:58 schrieb Lars Heuer:
> Hi Christian,
>
> > i tried to merge two topic maps and received an
> > IdentityConstraintException because the same identifier was added to two
> > different topics which in my opinion is correct behaviour according to
> > the TMDM.
> > So I wrote the following test program where I added the same subject
> > identifier to two different topics which should be merged by the engine.
> > The result was the same exception. Am I missing something?
>
> Thanks for your e-mail. tinyTiM does not merge topics automatically.
> That means, the IdentityConstraintException is correct. You can always
> catch is and merge topics manually:
>
> Topic topic1 =
> testMap.createTopicBySubjectIdentifier(testMap.createLocator(test_locator))
>; topic1.createName("Test1");
>
> Topic topic2 = testMap.createTopic();
> topic2.createName("Test2");
> try {
> topic2.addSubjectIdentifier(testMap.createLocator(test_locator));
> catch (IdentityConstraintException ex) {
> Topic existing = (Topic) ex.getExisting();
> topic2.mergeIn(existing);
> }
>
>
> An alternative, and much better approach would be:
>
> Topic topic1 = testMap.createTopicBySubjectIdentifier(
> testMap.createLocator(test_locator));
> topic1.createName("Test1");
>
> Topic topic2 = testMap.createTopicBySubjectIdentifier(test_locator);
> topic2.createName("Test2");
>
>
> Here, topic2 would be equals to topic1 since the engine ensures that
> it either returns an existing topic with the provided subject
> identifier or creates a topic with that subject identifier in the
> "TopicMap.createTopicBySubjectIdentifier" method. TMAPI 2.0 supports
> also "createTopicByItemIdentifier" and "createTopicBySubjectLocator"
> with the same semantics.
>
> Best regards,
> Lars
Hi and thanks for the fast response.
The actual problem is that I try to merge two topic maps which I deserialize
from different files, in my case an topic map schema and a topic map which I
want to verify according to that schema. The exception is thrown in the
mergeIn method of the topic map. I assume that the engine tries to merge two
topics by creating a third one which gets all properties of one of those
topics, which cases the IdentityConstraintException to be thrown.
I hope this specifies my problem more further.
Best reguards,
Christian
--
Christian Haß, Msc.
Abteilung Automatische Sprachverarbeitung
Institut für Informatik | Universität Leipzig
Johannisgasse 26 | Raum 00-18 | 04103 Leipzig
phone: 0049 - 341 - 97 - 32298
fax: 0049 - 341 - 97 - 32299
mail: ha...@in...
======================================
Topic Maps Lab
http://www.topicmapslab.de
======================================
|
|
From: Lars H. <he...@se...> - 2009-11-03 13:47:50
|
Hi Christian,
> i tried to merge two topic maps and received an IdentityConstraintException
> because the same identifier was added to two different topics which in my
> opinion is correct behaviour according to the TMDM.
> So I wrote the following test program where I added the same subject
> identifier to two different topics which should be merged by the engine. The
> result was the same exception. Am I missing something?
Thanks for your e-mail. tinyTiM does not merge topics automatically.
That means, the IdentityConstraintException is correct. You can always
catch is and merge topics manually:
Topic topic1 =
testMap.createTopicBySubjectIdentifier(testMap.createLocator(test_locator));
topic1.createName("Test1");
Topic topic2 = testMap.createTopic();
topic2.createName("Test2");
try {
topic2.addSubjectIdentifier(testMap.createLocator(test_locator));
catch (IdentityConstraintException ex) {
Topic existing = (Topic) ex.getExisting();
topic2.mergeIn(existing);
}
An alternative, and much better approach would be:
Topic topic1 = testMap.createTopicBySubjectIdentifier(
testMap.createLocator(test_locator));
topic1.createName("Test1");
Topic topic2 = testMap.createTopicBySubjectIdentifier(test_locator);
topic2.createName("Test2");
Here, topic2 would be equals to topic1 since the engine ensures that
it either returns an existing topic with the provided subject
identifier or creates a topic with that subject identifier in the
"TopicMap.createTopicBySubjectIdentifier" method. TMAPI 2.0 supports
also "createTopicByItemIdentifier" and "createTopicBySubjectLocator"
with the same semantics.
Best regards,
Lars
--
Semagia
<http://www.semagia.com>
|
|
From: Christian H. <ha...@in...> - 2009-11-03 12:51:49
|
Hi all,
i tried to merge two topic maps and received an IdentityConstraintException
because the same identifier was added to two different topics which in my
opinion is correct behaviour according to the TMDM.
So I wrote the following test program where I added the same subject
identifier to two different topics which should be merged by the engine. The
result was the same exception. Am I missing something?
TopicMapSystemFactory factory = TopicMapSystemFactory.newInstance();
TopicMapSystem system = factory.newTopicMapSystem();
TopicMap testMap = system.createTopicMap("test:test");
String test_locator = "http://my.test";
Topic topic1 =
testMap.createTopicBySubjectIdentifier(testMap.createLocator(test_locator));
topic1.createName("Test1");
Topic topic2 = testMap.createTopic();
topic2.createName("Test2");
topic2.addSubjectIdentifier(testMap.createLocator(test_locator));
Best, Christian
--
Christian Haß, Msc.
Abteilung Automatische Sprachverarbeitung
Institut für Informatik | Universität Leipzig
Johannisgasse 26 | Raum 00-18 | 04103 Leipzig
phone: 0049 - 341 - 97 - 32298
fax: 0049 - 341 - 97 - 32299
mail: ha...@in...
======================================
Topic Maps Lab
http://www.topicmapslab.de
======================================
|
|
From: Lars H. <he...@se...> - 2009-09-15 14:16:38
|
Hi Markus, [...] > +1 for an early transition w/o delay :) Ok :) I'll prepare a release this week. Best regards, Lars -- Semagia <http://www.semagia.com> |
|
From: Markus U. <mar...@gm...> - 2009-09-11 14:06:02
|
Lars Heuer schrieb: > What do you think? Do you like to see a tinytim-mio-2.0a6 release > without the tmapix-io dependency? Delaying the dependency to tmapix-io > till mio-2.0a7 would also be acceptable for me. +1 for an early transition w/o delay :) Ad astra, Markus |
|
From: Lars H. <he...@se...> - 2009-09-11 13:00:18
|
Hi all, Aside from the CTMWriter I ported all classes of tinytim.mio to org.tmapix.io [1]. Additionally, the tmapix.io package contains an experimental LTMTopicMapWriter that writes (guess what) LTM 1.3. The changes to existing code should be minimal, you'll only need to change the package name from org.tinytim.mio to org.tmapix.io (I'll provide a migration doc). My current plan is, to release tmapix-io 0.3.0 soon and to deprecate the tinytim.mio package. The tinytim.mio 2.0a6 release will consist of wrapper classes that adapt the tmapix-io interfaces / classes to org.tinytim.mio. You can use tinytim-mio as it is but you'll get deprecation warnings. What do you think? Do you like to see a tinytim-mio-2.0a6 release without the tmapix-io dependency? Delaying the dependency to tmapix-io till mio-2.0a7 would also be acceptable for me. Or should I follow my plan as described above? [1] <http://tmapix.googlecode.com/> Best regards, Lars -- Semagia <http://www.semagia.com> |
|
From: Lukas G. <in...@Fh...> - 2009-08-24 07:31:15
|
Hi Lars, thanks for your answer. I already found some information published by Garshol, but not this one: <http://www.garshol.priv.no/blog/10.html>. Regards Lukas Lars Heuer schrieb: > Hi Lukas, > > [...] > >> mapping-schema. Are any example schemata existing? >> > > I found a blog entry from Lars Marius which maps SKOS to Topic Maps: > <http://www.garshol.priv.no/blog/10.html> > > > Best regards, > Lars > |
|
From: Lars H. <he...@se...> - 2009-08-23 14:11:55
|
Hi Lukas, [...] > mapping-schema. Are any example schemata existing? I found a blog entry from Lars Marius which maps SKOS to Topic Maps: <http://www.garshol.priv.no/blog/10.html> Best regards, Lars -- Semagia <http://www.semagia.com> |
|
From: Lars H. <he...@se...> - 2009-08-23 13:55:35
|
Hi again, [...] > Isidorus. I also want to get a brief introduction into the RDf-mapping > in tinyTiM, to be able to exchange mapped data between tinyTiT and Some abstract examples are also shown here: <http://tinytim.sourceforge.net/docs/2.0/mio/rdf-import.html>. Although they show only the API and not a concrete mapping. Best regards, Lars -- Semagia <http://www.semagia.com/> |
|
From: Lars H. <he...@se...> - 2009-08-23 13:53:28
|
[...] > Some abstract examples are also shown here: > <http://tinytim.sourceforge.net/docs/2.0/mio/rdf-import.html>. > Although they show only the API and not a concrete mapping. The docs are slightly outdated: The openrdf lib is not required anymore. You need the ``semagia-mio``, and the ``semagia-mio-rdf`` lib. They are part of the tinytim-mio distribution. Best regards, Lars -- Semagia <http://www.semagia.com/> |
7 messages has been excluded from this view by a project administrator.
