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: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 20:34:38 +0200
To: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
Message-ID: <m38ycci9c1.fsf@ontopia.net>


* Graham Klyne
| 
| A good question, which I won't attempt to answer directly.

I don't blame you. :-)
 
| Or, in this case, in what way can Semantic Web technologies be of
| benefit to applications that use or are based on topic maps.

I think this leads us full circle back to where we started. The
question is good, but hinges entirely on what "semantic web
technologies" are. For example, if topic maps are considered one of
them, we have to consider how topic maps can be of benefit to
applications that use or are based on topic maps...

If the Semantic Web is seen as RDF, and only RDF, then clearly topic
maps are not a semantic web technology. However, if XML is included as
well, then it seems obvious that topic maps are a semantic web
technology.  (Not so much because they have an XML interchange syntax
as because they are much closer to the semantic web vision than XML on
its own is.)

The topic map vision has been described as "seamless knowledge," which
is kind of like the semantic web, yet different. For example, it isn't
necessarily global in scope, nor does it necessarily involve the web.
But the vision is similar to what was described in the famous SciAm
article.

I've no idea whether this is any help at all. :-)

-- 
Lars Marius Garshol, Ontopian         <URL: http://www.ontopia.net >
GSM: +47 98 21 55 50                  <URL: http://www.garshol.priv.no >
Received on Wednesday, 18 August 2004 18:35:10 UTC

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