Working towards the next version of the SWIM Supporting Material

Page tree

Working towards the next version of the SWIM Supporting Material

Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 4 Next »

The opportunity

It is not clear in which order to read traces when there are more than one in a single semantic correspondence statement. Some traces are, in fact, qualifiers of other traces. Is it possible to somehow differentiate the traces and apply a reading order?

Background

Much of the background has been captured in the comments section below.

Discussion

The discussion has been split into parts to make easier to follow.

Assumptions

The traces are to be read by humans/machines

The traces are to be created by humans/machines

Different types of traces

SWIM-INFO-016 Mapping of information concepts requires one concept trace

SWIM-INFO-017 Mapping of data concepts requires one concept trace and one data type trace

SWIM-INFO-018 Additional traces to clarify the mapping allows any number of additional "clarifying" traces

Source and target of traces


Reading order of traces

General consensus seems to be:

  1. "concept" trace
  2. "data type" trace
  3. "additional" traces

Annotating traces

Level of semantic correspondence

See Rule 60 below for resuse

Representing traces in XSD

Example of tracing

Julia's example




  • No labels