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

Re: Concept Map VS Topic Map.

From: Lars Marius Garshol <larsga@ontopia.net>
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 12:18:42 +0200
To: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
Message-ID: <m3657j4c8t.fsf@ontopia.net>


* Sandy Pan
|  
| 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, 

Topic maps can be used to as a basis for visualizing information in
several different ways, for example by driving a web site or portal
from a topic map (there are a number of commercial examples of this)
or using graphical visualization techniques (not sure if there are
that many commercial deployments of this yet).

However, when used for these purposes topic maps function less as a
brainstorming tool, and more as a kind of application development
technology.

| and how could it be more advanced than other technology/techniques,
| for example, comparing it with conventional Concept Maps,

I think topic maps and RDF belong together, as they are at least both
technologies, and concept maps are just very very different from them.
  
| 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. 

Well, topic maps (and RDF) have such rules. So that's one thing to
note in the comparison straight away. In fact, nearly everything is
different when you compare CMs to TM/RDF, so the difficulty is not
finding differences, but finding something that is similar.

| 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?

That's a good question. I know the organizers of the International
Semantic Web Conference considered doing a panel on this question, so
I guess the answer is somewhat unclear. Some people would say no,
others yes (and I think you'd find W3C people in both camps).
Personally, I can't really answer that, since I'm not sure what it
means to be a semantic web technology.

-- 
Lars Marius Garshol, Ontopian         <URL: http://www.ontopia.net >
GSM: +47 98 21 55 50                  <URL: http://www.garshol.priv.no >
Received on Monday, 16 August 2004 10:19:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:14:57 UTC