**This is an old revision of the document!** ----
====== MVF Issues ====== This page captures the issues that have undergone, or are undergoing, significant discussion among the participants to the joint submission. ===== Open Issues ===== These issues have not been resolved by any clear agreement. ==== Linking model elements to concepts ==== What does a model element link to? Some "concept" object? Multiple terms/entries in different vocabularies? * Proposal: Placeholder ‘concept’ object lives somewhere. It is linked to entries in multiple vocabularies. Model elements link to it. Where does it live? Is it in a separate resource from all vocabularies? Is it just an IRI that all the related language vocabularies agree to use? If so, then the link from the model element is the IRI, but how does the modeling tool find the language-based vocabulary entries? * Proposal: The model element contains the links to all of the corresponding vocabulary entries. The idea that they represent the same concept is implied. Effectively, the model element is the cluster point and the reference form of the concept. Objection (Evan): The business concept exists without the model. The model element should not be the center concept. Model element to concept relationships are also many-to-many. Different models may have links to different vocabulary entries (in different languages) for the same concept. How would the modeling tool or the user find translations of a business term that are only linked by other models? * Proposal: A concept is a vocabulary entry, or something in a vocabulary that entries link to. These entries can be linked to each other across vocabularies, or in a separate resource (a la Linked Open Data). The model element can point to any of those resources as a starting point. The effect is that the model element points to one element of some kind of linked list. How does one add to the list? Is it circular? And how easy is that to maintain, if multiple tools are involved? ==== Nature of a vocabulary "entry" ==== A vocabulary is a collection of terms related to concepts represented by definitions or descriptions (a weaker notion). What is the conceptual organization? What is the nature of a vocabulary entry? What is the relationship of a "concept" to a vocabulary "entry"? * Proposal: A vocabulary contains a set of "concepts", and each concept has one or more attached terms. So an "entry" is a "concept". Model elements link to these "concepts" (somehow). An entry may contain zero or more definitions or descriptions. The entry/concept has an IRI that extends the vocabulary IRI. The list/set of concept entries expands to a set of terms that point back to the concept, and the terms are sorted or hashed to enable looking up concepts using the terms. Multiple entries in different vocabularies then represent the same concept, but each has its own IRI. How are they linked? Is there some common IRI and if so, how does it get created? * Proposal: (The Dictionary model) A concept is/has a Definition or Description. An entry is a term, and a term is linked to one or more Definitions/Descriptions, where some "context" participates in the links if there is more than one for a given term. Synonyms could be linked directly to the definitions or to some primary term. The definitions/descriptions must have IRIs that extend the vocabulary IRI. Again, the same concept will have different definitions in different vocabularies/languages and thus different IRIs. How are they linked? * Proposal: (The SBVR model) An entry is a "designation" -- a relationship between a term (possibly in context) and a "concept" represented by a definition or description. The term (in context) and the definition/description independently represent the concept. Designations are unique, but the general model is many terms (in context) to 1 definition. So what has the IRI? The term-in-context? Or the "designation" relationship? Or the definition/description? How are designations linked across language vocabularies? And does the model element link to a designation? ==== Other stuff in entries ==== Real glossaries often contain other elements in entries, such as notes, examples, other forms/spellings, pronunciation guides, synonyms (with or without differentiation), antonyms, etymological information, etc. MVF should certainly **allow** the managed vocabulary resources to have this stuff. Do we need to model this at all? Does it affect the presentations in modeling tools? Does it affect the API? ===== Resolved Issues ===== There appears to be joint agreement on the resolution of these issues, although they may give rise to others.
