[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: RE: [tm-pubsubj-comment] Re: published subject assertions
> (from Bernard Vatant)
> For a botanist, an assertion like:
>
> "Fagales is a subclass of Dicotyledones"
This is an association. I personally do not know what Fagales is, nor Dicotyledones. So this assertion does not mean anything to me. I would prefer some descriptive text, that may contain hyperlinks to Dicotyledones and whatsoever, so that I could start to understand. It would be easy to arrange this using the "subject" topic characteristic.
The botanist needs not to follow the hyperlinks, as he will understand the lingo.
> whatever it "means"... belongs to the definition of Fagales,
> and has to be made distinct
> of any formal characteristic of a topic representing the
> class "Fagales" in a topic map.
> It is a non-formal assertion inherent to the subject definition.
Why? I am afraid I really do not understand Bernard here.
> Might seem subtle, but for me it's fundamental and not
> restarting from Adam & Eve, just
> putting distinct names on distinct things ...
Perhaps too subtle. When I said to me XTM seems to be too abstract, this looks like not being abstract enough.
Thomas Bandholtz
CM / KM Division Manager; XML Network Moderator
Competence Center Content Management
SchlumbergerSema
http://www.schlumbergersema.com
Kaltenbornweg 3
D50679 Köln / Cologne
Germany
+49 221 8299 264
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC