[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [tm-pubsubj] Range of Application
I agree with the focus on creating PSIs as a concept which is applicable to the managment of Taxonomies and Ontologies in general. Once it is explained in language that does not exclude applications I believe it will be referenced by many working in the semantic space. <quote who="Patrick Durusau"> > It is noted in the Scope and Purpose Statement of that document that: > >> The first and main target of this recommendation is therefore topic >> maps interoperability, through efficient definition and identification >> of subjects represented by topics in topic maps. > > In terms of definitions, while we may favor topic maps by using familiar > terms (to people in the topic map community), is there any reason to > think such definitions will not be equally applicable to any other > application or technology? > > What I am thinking is that the definitions should be as generic to the > general concept of PSIs as possible so as to allow for future > deliverables to address the needs to topic maps and other technologies > (or the development of deliverables by other communities for their own > purposes). > -- Carl Mattocks co-Chair OASIS ebXMLRegistry Semantic Content SC CEO CHECKMi v/f (usa) 908 322 8715 www.CHECKMi.com Semantically Smart Compendiums (AOL) IM CarlCHECKMi
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]