Re: "RDF + Topic Maps" = The Future
Hello Martin, You wrote: > Lisa wrote: > > > It's downright exciting! > > Both RDF and Topic Maps have the same weakness: They are only as good as the > semantics they are based on. Neither provides a standardized mechanism for > recording the meaning of the characteristic I tend to disagree. XTM distinguishes 2 types of topic subjects: addressable and non-addressable. If resource is referenced as an addressable subject, it means that the subject of the topic is the resource itself (just as you said, no meanings or implications) Syntactically it is expressed by means or <resourceRef> element. Extract from : A subject which is an addressable information resource, considered as a subject in and of itself, and not considered in terms of what the topic map author intends it to signify. However, a resource or a set of resources can be used to identify a non-addressable subject. For example I can address archives of this list to identify xml developers community. Or I can identify a book by its ISBN number (which is a record somewhere in Bowker Data Collection Center). Syntactically it is expressed by means or <subjectIdentityRef> element. Extract from : An information resource, considered in terms of what the topic map author intends it to signify, and not considered as a subject in and of itself.  http://www.topicmaps.org/xtm/1.0/xtmp1.html Thanks, Nikita. ------------------------------------------------------- Nikita Ogievetsky, Cogitech Inc. http://www.cogx.com nogievet@c... (917)406-8734 Consultant in XML/XSLT/Xlink/TopicMaps Cogito Ergo XML
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!
Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!
Download The World's Best XML IDE!
Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!
Subscribe in XML format