W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > August 2004

Re: Concept Map VS Topic Map.

From: Sandy Pan <sandy_lub@yahoo.com>
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 09:35:14 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <20040815163514.38360.qmail@web20221.mail.yahoo.com>
To: danny.ayers@gmail.com
Cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
thank u both for your reply
yes, i have looked in to TOpic Maps, i know MPs is very "multi-function" technology, however, hereby i just want to know MPs application in information visualization, and how could it be more advanced than other technology/techniques, for example, comparing it with conventional Concept Maps, 
and yes, i looked into CMs as well, as i learnt, CMs has no formal rules or regulations on how to form a CMs,(i may be wrong). that makes me more confused on how to compare it. so i want to find some  criteria to compare these two, as well as RDF based SW.
another questions, do you guys consider TMs as a SW technologies. ermmm, i persoally think TMs is one kind of SW technolgies. as i read some others paper, someone seemed to point that TMs is one of SW technologies, so how do u guys think of it?
thank u very much.

Danny Ayers <danny666@virgilio.it> wrote:
fyi, one of the leading tools for brainstorming-style concept mapping, 
CmapTools, can be found at [1]. Some other related software are amongst 
the links at [2].

What also may be of interest in the KM space are Conceptual Graphs (CGs) 
[3] that are an approach to expressing logical statements in a node & 
arc form. Some work has been done on mapping these to Topic Maps [4] 
(sorry, best I could Google - any more, Lars?) and RDF [5].

[1] http://cmap.ihmc.us/
[2] http://dannyayers.com/ideagraph-blog/archives/cat_related_software.html
[3] http://www.jfsowa.com/cg/index.htm
[4] http://www.techquila.com/cgi-bin/mt-comments.cgi?entry_id=41
[5] http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/CG.html

Lars Marius Garshol wrote:

>Hi Sandy,
>* Sandy Pan
>| i am doing some research in knowledge representation, there are many
>| technologies to be used, and i am interested in both Topic Maps and
>| Concept Map. can anyone enlighten me there differences on these two
>| technologies. some difference has been point out on ...
>| Concept Map emphasizes more on visual sense whereas TMs emphasized
>| on mathematical sense.
>| Concept Map is formalized as named nodes and labeled arcs whereas
>| TMs mainly deal withs TAOs and suchas.
>| so any more ideas on the differences, or how to compare these two
>| technologies, or what criteria should i concern.
>I think you've got the basic idea right, that concept maps are more of
>a visual technique that's intended for sketching, brainstorming, and
>illustration, while topic maps are a knowledge technology, which is
>intended to be used to create applications. So there's a huge
>difference in emphasis, and I would say that they are really different
>kinds of things; one being a technique, and the other a technology.
>Further, topic maps are an ISO standard, while I don't think concept
>maps have been formalized even as a visual technique (though I might
>be wrong), and there is (again as far as I know) no interchange format
>for concept maps, nor any schema or query language.



Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.
Received on Sunday, 15 August 2004 16:35:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:07:52 UTC