- From: Bernard Vatant <bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>
- Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 23:48:27 +0200
- To: "Topicmapmail@Infoloom. Com" <topicmapmail@infoloom.com>, "Www-Rdf-Logic@W3. Org" <www-rdf-logic@w3.org>
A recipe that can be found at http://www.mondeca.com/owl/owltm.htm >From the introduction : "... If ontologies are to become effectively the backbone technology for mainstream Semantic Web application, Topic Maps cannot keep on pretending they are agnostic about it, and play in a completely orthogonal field. On the contrary, they should actually try and formalize their implicit ontology, or certainly ontologies, for it might well turn out that no consensus on a single ontology can be achieved, and that a formal conceptualization effort will bring about several flavors of Topic Maps, more or less constrained. In any case, for such a formalization, using OWL should be considered as the natural approach. This paper does not pretend to provide a complete formalization of Topic Maps in OWL, but tries to grab in a pragmatic way some low-hanging fruits, and cook some basic useful recipe with them. It addresses the TM concepts that are the easiest to grab, and also the less controversial ones: topic, association, role, occurrence, their respective classes, and constraints that can bind them. The objectives seem quite limited, but actually cover a large domain of practical frequent needs in Topic Maps authoring ..." Many comments welcome, both from TM and OWL folks. Bernard Vatant Senior Consultant Knowledge Engineering Mondeca - www.mondeca.com bernard.vatant@mondeca.com
Received on Friday, 1 August 2003 17:48:46 UTC