RE: Review of RDFTM Survey


First of all, thank you for your very useful review of the
Survey. I haven't replied yet because I didn't want to preempt
the discussion at the F2F, but I will certainly get back to
you with a detailed response.

I just want to comment on one issue, since it has come up in
your discussion with Lars Marius:

| Regardless of the guidance on that, what probably raised a red flag for 
| me was the way it was mentioned. Something like "Garshol sketches some 
| solutions for the tricky cases along the lines of X, which has since 
| been implemented in the Ontopia Knowledge Suite". However, unlike for 
| all the other approaches, there are no details of how these tricky 
| questions are addressed.

Actually, the bullet list following this text *does* provide almost
all the details. It's rather compact, but it's all there.

That said, there is no particular reason to mention the OKS, other
than that we have mentioned all relevant implementations elsewhere
(Ogievetsky's xtm2rdf translator and the Unibo META tool), and that
we actually use the OKS for the test cases.


Steve Pepper <>
Chief Strategy Officer, Ontopia
Convenor, ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 34/WG 3
Editor, XTM (XML Topic Maps 1.0)

Received on Wednesday, 2 March 2005 20:00:05 UTC