[sc34wg3] Are topic maps about knowledge representation?

[Steve Pepper]

In the current "Editor's working copy" of the SAM at

    http://www.isotopicmaps.org/sam/sam-model/

the Introduction starts with this paragraph:

   Topic maps are abstract structures which encode
   information about a domain and connect this information to
   information resources that are considered relevant to the
   domain. Topic maps are organized around topics, which are
   symbols representing subjects of discourse, associations
   representing relationships between the subjects, and
   occurrences, which connect the subjects to pertinent
   information resources.

I propose to change this to the following:

   Topic maps are abstract structures which encode
   knowledge about a domain and connect this knowledge to
   information resources that are considered relevant to the
   domain. Topic maps are organized around topics, which are
   symbols representing subjects of discourse, associations
   representing relationships between the subjects, and
   occurrences, which connect the subjects to pertinent
   information resources.

To me, topic maps *are* about knowledge representation and I
think we should say so clearly in the standard.

I strongly believe there is a sense in which we can legitimately
claim that topic maps capture knowledge. (For the record, I also
believe that we cannot legitimately say that topic maps capture
knowledge in ALL senses of the word...)

Steve

--
Steve Pepper, Chief Executive Officer <pepper@ontopia.net>
Convenor, ISO/IEC JTC1/SC34/WG3  Editor, XTM (XML Topic Maps)
Ontopia AS, Waldemar Thranes gt. 98, N-0175 Oslo, Norway.
http://www.ontopia.net/ phone: +47-23233080 GSM: +47-90827246