[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Topic Maps investigated: nice work, but no black magic

• From: Uche Ogbuji <uche.ogbuji@f...>
• To: xml-dev@x...
• Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2000 10:40:18 -0700 (MST)

> You're claiming that XTM provides an entire semantic network mechanism
> into its basic technology?  I'd be impressed if I could be convinced, but
> based on what you've been saying so far, all XTM does in that direction is
> to allow specialization of the arcs.

So rather than continuing to conjecture, I went and educated myself.
Quite intriguing.

First of all, it seems that TM does indeed claim to implement semantic
networks, and more.  Fair enough.

It's quite clear that there is no question of TM vs. RDF whatsoever.  TM
can be easily implemented in RDF.  The question of whether to implement
XTM or a hypothetical RTM would IMO be entirely based on what other processing
you're doing.  If you use links heavily and have solid general XLink
tools, XTM probably makes sense.  Ditto if you generally use RDF.

TM also seems to be _very_ similar to work we have done in RDF for similar
purpose.  I think we probably reinvented the TM wheel in RDF.  I think I
have a quick and easy holiday project: RTM.


-- 
Uche Ogbuji                               Principal Consultant
uche.ogbuji@f...               +1 303 583 9900 x 101
Fourthought, Inc.                         http://Fourthought.com
4735 East Walnut St, Ste. C, Boulder, CO 80301-2537, USA
Software-engineering, knowledge-management, XML, CORBA, Linux, Python

• Prev by Date: RE: A Light Rant On Ontological Commitment
• Next by Date: Re: "RDF + Topic Maps" = The Future
• Previous by thread: XHTML Basic goes to Recommendation
• Next by thread: RE: Schemata are not just constraints [was: "RDF + Topic Maps" = TheFuture]
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread