- From: Mikael Nilsson <mini@nada.kth.se>
- Date: 18 Jun 2002 13:38:29 +0200
- To: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
Hi! While on the subject of Topic Maps: I'm playing with the idea of refactoring Topic Maps on top of RDF. Most Topic Map <-> RDF efforts are concerned mostly with translating between them, taking all artefacts of both into account. On the other hand, if we insist on using the RDF model (binary relationships etc etc), perhaps it would be a good idea to define a "pure" RDF vocabulary for the "essence" of Topic Maps. If you look at it this way, things look much simpler... Topic Maps RDF ~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~ Associations -> No new vocabulary, just use Properties and RDFS Topics -> No new vocabulary, just use Resources and RDFS etc. Occurences -> No counterpart in RDF - new vocab needed. So, in fact, we would need to model occurences in RDF. This is resonable, as the primary invention of Topic Maps really is the digital modeling of occurences. It has been stated over and over that they are reasonably similar regarding the topic relationships, but occurences has to my knowledge not been modeled in RDF. Now I wonder: before I write a paper on this, has anyone seen this done? What do you think of the idea? /Mikael
Received on Tuesday, 18 June 2002 07:38:53 UTC