Lists Home |
Date Index |
- From: Nikita Ogievetsky <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- To: Uche Ogbuji <email@example.com>
- Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2000 14:58:21 -0500
(sorry previous e-mail wen away a little bit unfinished.)
> > > But as far as I know (I might be wrong, please correct me if this is
> > > case)
> > > RDF has no STANDARD! way to carry forward the origin of opinion.
> > >
> > RDF does have a standard way to declare the origin of a statement
> > an opinion is derived from a statement). This is the distinction between
> > statement and stating and is the point of statement "reification". The
> > is that since everything is a resource, one can make statements about
> > statements which is how I assume one might make a statement regarding
> > origin of a statement.
> If I understand Nikita correctly (which I hope I'm finally beginning to),
> his point is not that there is no meta-statement facility at all, but that
> there is no standard vocabulary for the arcs from the reified statement to
> node representing the attributed party (or vice versa).
> If I interpret him correctly, then, as I told him, this is not the role of
> RDF, and there is no reason not to just use the vocab from topic maps for
> this purpose.
Yes, you are absolutely right!
I also believe that I was talking to much :-))
Because besides other things I also said:
> Now note that XTM is Topic Maps concept expressed in XML syntax using
> XLink (XML Topic Maps).
> There can be an RDF syntax for Topic Maps!
I meant RDF Schema, but probably it is more correct to call it RDF vocab?
( may be I not using the right language?)
However there is one very important issue to watch out in RTM:
> The problem is that just RDF Topic Maps syntax is not enough.
> You will need additional software modules to take care of certain
> constraints and the processing model.
I.e. Topic Maps conceptual / processing model is really important !!
Nikita Ogievetsky, Cogitech Inc.
Consultant in XML/XSLT/Xlink/TopicMaps
Cogito Ergo XML