[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: RDF/Topic Maps: what's an Application? (was: Re: [topicmaps-comment]RE: OASIS vs W3C)
[Lars Marius Garshol:] > As for the original question: what RDF and topic maps > do better than each other, I can only agree that the > answer to this is less clear than it ought to be. I > trying to work this out for myself, but so far a > major part of the problem has been that I don't know > what anyone would use RDF for. (I'm not saying it's > useless, just that I am not very clueful about > practical applications of it.) I sympathize with Lars Marius. It has taken me a long time and a lot of help from very patient people to gain any understanding about this, and I'm not satisfied with the understanding that I have. > I hope the community can work out the answer to this > question, because I think it would be very good for > topic maps if we could answer it. It's not very good > for credibility if we don't have an answer to this. RDF and Topic Maps are surely different. I believe it is unnecessary (and therefore wrong) to think of these two things as competing with one another, technically. I think the competition is entirely about claims and perceptions, many of which are clearly inconsistent with themselves and with other perceptions even within their respective communities. Egad, what a mess! I claim: (1) A Topic Maps application can be an application of RDF. (2) An RDF application can be an application of Topic Maps. (3) Topic Maps itself can be an application of RDF. (4) RDF itself can be an application of Topic Maps. The above four kinds of applications are probably quite different from each other. If we ask: (1) Exactly what constitutes a comprehensive formal definition of an "application" of RDF? and (2) Exactly what constitutes a comprehensive formal definition of an "application" of Topic Maps? we will finally be on the road to learning what's really going on here. I wonder whether we can get consensus in either camp that we should work conscientiously to achieve consensus on how to define precisely the scope of an application of either paradigm? -Steve -- Steven R. Newcomb, Consultant srn@coolheads.com voice: +1 972 359 8160 fax: +1 972 359 0270 1527 Northaven Drive Allen, Texas 75002-1648 USA
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC