Re: [xtm-wg] Questions on topic maps

["Ivan Uemlianin" <ivan@jurakm.com>]

Dear Steve

Thank you for your reply.  However, it doesn't really allay my concerns.

ISO 13250 provides a mechanism to
> > represent the difference between a topic which just happened only/not to
have
> > any characteristics within a certain scope, and a topic which in
> > principle could only/not have characteristics within a certain scope?
namely, scope attributes of topic elements: a topic which has an
interpretation only in biology could be represented as something like [1].

[1] <topic scope="biology"><name>dysfunction</name> ... </topic>

This is different from [2].

[2] <topic><name scope="biology">dysfunction</name> ... </topic>

Given some UI and accessing this topic map from outside the scope "biology",
topic2 would show up with no characteristics, whereas topic1 would be
invisible and inaccessible.  I feel it is important to allow this
distinction.

My overall concern is that concepts generally have an interpretation only
within some context.  I am not saying here that 'occurrences' of concepts
always have a context (which is of course true), but that concepts
themselves are only valid within a context.  So, the biological concept of
'dysfunction' has an interpretation only in contexts derived from or
otherwise related to biology (eg it has no interpretation in mathematics or
physics); the concept 'England' has no interpretation in dietetics; the
concept 'banana' has no interpretation in astrophysics (these examples sound
absurd because the point is so trivial, covered in any relevant elementary
textbook: Sowa, 2000 has a whole chapter on it).

Any formalism aiming to represent knowledge should represent this ultimate
context-dependency of concepts---or at least allow its representation:
application developers may choose to ignore it for particular domains.

re your questions on *why*:
> Is it because the topic map is still going through an
> editorial process and is not yet finished?

When is a topic map 'finished'?  Surely any topic map in use will be having
topics added to and removed from it?  Is a topic map supposed to be a static
object?

> Other than that, what you would really need is a constraint
> language for your topic map that allows you to express
> rules about the kinds of characteristics that topics can
> or should have.

I had thought that the topic@scope attribute in ISO 13250 would be enough.

Regards

Ivan

Ivan Uemlianin, PhD
Head of Topic Map Development
Jura Technology Ltd

6 Tai Seion
Llanddeiniolen
Caernarfon
Gwynedd LL55 3AF


Head Office:
35 Norroy Road
London SW15 1PQ



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

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

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