Re: [xtm-wg] shared views of a community

[G_B <gbedja@amphibia.com>]

This is true and timely. As an information specialist with library and
instructional background, I clearly see how topic maps is the best available
solution for creating the "next-generation" reference tools and
learning aids. However, I lack in programming skills - as Paul puts
it:

PP> Those of us that want to apply the topic map paradigm to knowledge
PP> elicitation and knowledge sharing tasks have a very hard time taking the
PP> very first steps into building and using topic maps and the topic map
PP> concepts.  Simple examples designed to help the Newbie are absent.  Simple
PP> tools to allow naive experimentation are absent.  Moreover, those who are
PP> the leadership are occupied trying to make a living and not really able to
PP> give of their personal time.  So economic issues are present.

In my spare time I'm trying to apply topic maps to the Web Searcher's
Handbook, which I wrote recently, but it might take years :-) before
my vision of the end result translates into a working prototype - with
this fits-and-starts approach in the absence of simple testing tools
and tutorials.
I think I'm not alone in that, and there are lots of people, experts
in their fields, who are willing to try topic maps on their knowledge
- provided they don't have to put on the programmer's hat.

Where can such introductory tools and tutorials come from? We can
hardly expect them from a lone topic maps philanthropist or from the
few commercial players in the field. So it can be listed among the
tasks of the nascent free-form and formalized topic map communities
and other structures. It would give topic maps a much needed boost.

Gen Bedjanian
Web Searcher


PP> Perhaps some thought is needed regarding whether or not time should be used
PP> testing the paradigm in new ways.  We need economic resources to fund tests,
PP> and we need those who can contribute personal time.  Jack Parks has some
PP> open source java tools (that I have not been able to figure out how to use.)
PP> see:  http://nexist.sourceforge.net   Perhaps someone here knows java well
PP> enough to show the rest of us what Jack's tool sets do and how they
PP> function.  Lars Marius Garshol and W.M. Jaworski clearly have an interest in
PP> an applied TM project that breaks new ground.  Professor Jaworski has clear
PP> insights into the problem of opening up a human control interface to Topic
PP> Map (or more generally cognitive graph (Sowa - Peirce - Pospelov) semiotics
PP> systems.  Kal Ahmed has helped me understand the scope of the problem we
PP> face in getting topic map tools in use by non-computer scientists.

PP> The community of practice (Com-Prac@yahoogroups.com ) e-forum has
PP> individuals who can easily develop mid to long term value propositions for a
PP> private investment in such a project.  Either the BCNGroup (a not for
PP> profit) or the OntologyStream can provide a business structure around such a
PP> project - to serve an open source project - not to just make money.

PP> However, the relationship of topic maps to cognitive maps, mind maps, value
PP> chains, cognitive graphs, etc can not be explored without the Topic Map
PP> community making an effort to include other communities.  This effort needs
PP> funding to work, as these individuals have already donated more of their
PP> personal time that is healthy.

PP> ***

PP> What needs to be overcome?:

PP> Members a different community are working with notions of self and community
PP> image, and in this work it is possible to talk about how various communities
PP> form a structural coupling (to use the terms of art in social-biology -
PP> Verala and Maturana invented) that supports the communities stability within
PP> an environment.

PP> Intra-community interaction is then the "subject of investigation".

PP> One of the results of working out a language for these notions is to present
PP> a general systems perspective on group activity.  The notions are not so
PP> difficult to understand, but it does become controversial.  The language
PP> does help one understand the nature of communities of practice and the
PP> nature of knowledge sharing within communities.

PP> When someone pushes on the shared views of a community, the topic map
PP> community, for example; then there is sometimes the uncovering of truths
PP> about the communities shared views that are not going to be easily accepted
PP> by the community.  Particularly in the case where the task engaged by the
PP> community is one that is largely unsolved.

PP> Creating a knowledge sharing standard for mediation of knowledge within
PP> virtual communities and involving computational resources is a largely
PP> unsolved task.  This is not purely a task involving computer science.  Yet
PP> there is some high degree of dedication, within the topic maps community, to
PP> the notion to computer science is all that is needed to apply topic maps to
PP> the task.  There are some who, along with me, wish that this dedication
PP> would soften just a bit so that the paradigm could be tested in a less
PP> structured application space (E-business - for example).

PP> ***

PP> What can be done?:

PP> Perhaps initial comments could be sent to Com-Prac since this is the
PP> community where new areas of application of the Topic map paradigm might be
PP> made.  Then a separate forum can be created if we decide to move forward.

PP> I am sure that this discussion is NOT of interest to everyone.  So perhaps a
PP> new forum will be created - to bring together a intra community discussion
PP> and perhaps to define a project where-by some topic map tools are shown to
PP> non-computer scientists who have an interest in where topic maps fit as a
PP> knowledge sharing technology.



To Post a message, send it to:   xtm-wg@eGroups.com

To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: xtm-wg-unsubscribe@eGroups.com 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/