ORB Visualization
Return to TopQuadrant's
communication
3/17/2004
11:40 AM
Irene and Ralph said:
Topic Map has an intuitive meta model for talking
about things. RDF is more generic which leads to it being less intuitive,
nonetheless capable to represent all the distinctions in Topic Maps.
Prueitt’s reply:
It is simply not factual that RDF is more generic. One can quote the paper you quote form:
http://www.idealliance.org/europe/04/call/xmlpapers/03-03-03.91/.03-03-03.html#S3.1.2
on this point exactly.
But Bernard Vatant and Lars Garshol are not representing the spirit of Topic Maps even though they have to admit the limitation to RDF systems. For example in,
http://www.ontopia.net/topicmaps/materials/tmrdf.html#N823
Garshol saids:
Modelling topic maps in RDF has been
done several times, for example in [Moore01], [Lacher01], [Ogievetsky01],
and [Garshol02].
Invariably, this results in using RDF nodes to represent names, occurrences,
and associations, and using statements to attach types, scopes, and so on to
the nodes.
(all four of the
links in this statement are not accessable to the public !! )
But, my dear friends, the original point of the Topic Map concept is that there are subjects that exist outside of the computer. No honest mathematician or natural scientist would claim that all aspects of natural physical systems could be modeled by formalism. In fact, this is the point of having the human capabilities in the loop when this problem of fidelity of reification becomes the origin of false sense making.
The contention that RDF is superior to Topic Maps is only true if one counts the money made in selling these system development projects over and over again. The value to society is not being taken into account.
Topic Maps does not get into the same type of first order logic mess as does OWL and RDF.
Those who use Topic Maps correctly, do not use first order logics on purpose.
This is because the first order logics are established, through exhaustive experiments, as having limited capability to deliver common sense, as the Cyc Corp system has promised for over two decades.
If one looks carefully at the work by Steven Newcomb and Michel Biezunski, who wrote the original draft of the Topic Maps standard, before being forced out by the new “editors”, one will see the something called HyTime and Grove was being considered as a means to make mapping between reification instances.
This is a totally different world, and is completely consistent with HIP (Human-centric Information Production).
HIP software can exhibit an appearance of intelligence far beyond what has been exhibited by any RDF system.
But this appearance comes about by allowing the human to play
a central role in induction and reification.