W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > March 2006

RE: topic maps/cmaps

From: Hans Teijgeler <hans.teijgeler@quicknet.nl>
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 12:48:44 +0100
To: <a.garcia@imb.uq.edu.au>, "'Misha Wolf'" <Misha.Wolf@reuters.com>, <newsml-2@yahoogroups.com>, <semantic-web@w3.org>
Message-ID: <001e01c64694$18f3c1d0$6c7ba8c0@hans>
Hi,

I looked into ISO 13250 for a definition of Topic Map. I found the following
(rather circular) definition:

3.26 topic map
a) A set of information resources regarded by a topic map application as a
bounded object set
whose hub document is a topic map document conforming to the SGML
architecture defined by
this International Standard.
b) Any topic map document conforming to the SGML architecture defined by
this International
Standard, or the document element (topicmap) of such a document.
c) The document element type (topicmap) of the topic map document
architecture.

There is no definition given for 'topic map document', although that is part
of all three sub-definitions.

I also found: "an interchangeable topic map always consists of at least one
SGML document". ISO 15926 does not know of SGML, and is not document-driven
in the SGML way.

Conceptual Maps are something I heard of before, but do not know very well.
I found the following diagram:


Interesting, but not what ISO 15926 covers.

So, I regret not to be capable of helping you.

Regards,

Hans

-----Original Message-----
From: a.garcia@imb.uq.edu.au [HYPERLINK
"mailto:a.garcia@imb.uq.edu.au"mailto:a.garcia@imb.uq.edu.au]
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 1:31
To: Hans Teijgeler; 'Misha Wolf'; newsml-2@yahoogroups.com;
semantic-web@w3.org
Subject: topic maps/cmaps

What is the difference between a topic map and a conceptual map?

On Sat, 11 Mar 2006 11:18:53 +0100
  "Hans Teijgeler" <hans.teijgeler@quicknet.nl> wrote:
>
> Hi Misha,
>
> In ISO 15926 we use 'templates' that are in fact n-ary relations [1].
>I  think that is what you might consider. You then build a vocabulary
>of such  templates.
>
> [1] HYPERLINK
"http://www.w3.org/TR/swbp-n-aryRelations/"http://www.w3.org/TR/swbp-n-aryRe
lations/
>
> Regards,
> Hans
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>From: semantic-web-request@w3.org
>[HYPERLINK
"mailto:semantic-web-request@w3.org"mailto:semantic-web-request@w3.org] On
Behalf Of Misha Wolf
> Sent: Friday, March 10, 2006 21:34
> To: newsml-2@yahoogroups.com; semantic-web@w3.org
> Subject: Event significance
>
>
> Our journalists want to be able to indicate the significance of an
>event to  one or more entities.  Consider hurricane Katrina.  It had a
>high  significance to (among others) New Orleans, Louisiana, the oil
>industry.  So  how could we indicate this in NewsML 2?  It is rather
>challenging, as we're  talking about the interaction between a number
>of
>subjects:
> -  the event itself (a hurricane)
> -  the city of New Orleans
> -  the state of Louisiana
> -  the oil sector
>
> As has been mentioned today in another thread, the NewsML 2 approach
>is to  design and use our own metadata structures and to write
>transforms which can  convert these metadata structures to RDF.
> That way we can write XML which is very compact, easy to understand, 
>expressive, and easy to convert to RDF, eg:
>
>  <subject code="iso3166-2:US-LA" relevance="80"
>confidence="80"
>      created="2005-08-29">
>    <sameAs code="usps:LA"/>
>    <childOf code="iso3166-1:US"/>
>    <title xml:lang="en">Louisiana</title>
>    <title xml:lang="fr">Louisiane</title>
>  </subject>
>
>For more details, see the NewsML 2 draft Technical Specification [1].
>
> So how can we design in significance?  My current thinking is that
> we:
>
> -  Add a significance attribute to the subject element.
>
> -  State that when this attribute is applied to a subject which
>   represents an entity, then the value of the attribute represents
>   the significance to that entity of any nearby subject which
>   represents an event.
>  
> What do I mean by "nearby"?  If a <bag/> has been used to group the 
>subjects, then nearby means within the bag.
>
> If a <bag/> has not been used to group the subjects, then nearby means 
>within the item metadata.
>
> BTW, I imagine that an event could have a type of "event", eg:
>
>  <subject code="nc:03007000" type="typ:event">
>    <childOf code="nc:03000000"/>
>    <title xml:lang="en">Meteorological disaster</title>
>    <title xml:lang="fr">Désastre météorologique</title>  </subject>
>
> which would make it easier to figure out which of the subjects is the
>event.
>
> If other events were present, eg:
>
>  <subject code="nc:03005000" type="typ:event">
>    <childOf code="nc:03000000"/>
>    <title xml:lang="en">Flood</title>
>    <title xml:lang="fr">Inondation</title>  </subject>
>
> then the significance relationship would encompass all of them.
>
> Note that an event or set of events often has a different significance
>for  different entities.  For example, Katrina had some impact on the
>US Space  Shuttle program, but this effect was minor compared to the
>effect on New  Orleans.
>
> Similarly, consider a large company buying, or investing in, a small 
>company.  The effect of the transaction on the large company may be
>small,  but the effect on the small company may be large.
>
> This is why the significance has to be directly associated with the
>subject  representing the entity, not with the subject representing the
>event.
>
> Please let me have your comments.
>
> [1] HYPERLINK
"http://www.iptc.org/NAR/1.0/specification/"http://www.iptc.org/NAR/1.0/spec
ification/
>
> Misha
> ------------------- NewsML 2 resources
>------------------------------
> HYPERLINK "http://www.iptc.org/"http://www.iptc.org/        | HYPERLINK
"http://www.iptc.org/NAR/"http://www.iptc.org/NAR/
> HYPERLINK "http://www.iptc.org/NAR/1.0"http://www.iptc.org/NAR/1.0 |
>HYPERLINK
"http://groups.yahoo.com/group/newsml-2/"http://groups.yahoo.com/group/newsm
l-2/
>
>
> To find out more about Reuters visit
>www.about.reuters.com
>
> Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual
>sender,  except where the sender specifically states them to be the
>views of Reuters  Ltd.
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.2.1/279 - Release
>Date: 10-Mar-06
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.2.1/279 - Release
>Date: 10-Mar-06
>
>
>

Alexander Garcia

--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.2.1/279 - Release Date: 10-Mar-06




-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.2.1/279 - Release Date: 10-Mar-06
 
  




T1_N141_A3_CmapTools_small.gif
(image/gif attachment: T1_N141_A3_CmapTools_small.gif)

Received on Monday, 13 March 2006 11:50:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 07:41:50 UTC