[sc34wg3] Analysis of TMRM Use Cases
13 Apr 2004 12:09:07 -0400
> But Michel, like many others, is plainly wrong when he states:
> > Topic Maps users want their information to be connectable
> > with others. Otherwise why would they be doing topic maps for?
> There are many, many potential applications of Topic Maps, as Jim has stated
> oft enough, where the purpose of applying Topic Maps is strictly not to
> allow "information to be connectable with others" - at least if by "others"
> you mean "other topic maps". Topic maps allow users to interconnect *their*
> information resources, whether they be stored in files, databases, RDF
> metadata sets, paper records or, God forbid, in the minds of the human
> resources within an organization. They are a tool for knowledge management,
> not necessarily knowledge dissemintation. Some information you do not want
> to disseminate, as Jim's use case so adequately demonstratates, but as sure
> as hell you need to ensure it is properly, adequately and timely managed.
> Tell me how many drug companies you know are using topic maps to connect to
> topic maps produced by their rivals. The number can be counted on the
> fingers of an armless man. Let's not get carried away by the supposed need
> of users to merge data. Commercial users need to be able to describe
> relationships between information occurrences, not topic maps. Unless we can
> describe these simply, adequately and in a way that fits users preceptions
> of the relationships between their data resources we will have failed.
> Fortunately, so far you have not left the users behind, and have been
> successful. Please keep us in mind while you argue over the techincal nitty
Fine. I agree with everything you say. My sentence was not clear enough.
It is not contradictory, what you are mentioning is another requirement
that we shouldn't neglect.
402 85th Street #5C
Brooklyn NY 11209
Web : http://www.coolheads.com
Voice: (718) 921-0901