Hi,<br><br>I've been reading all of the comments and I'm taking note of all of them because they all seem very valuable to me. I'm verry thankful really.<br><br>I agree in that there is some kind of solitaire fashion that one feels like when coming to this at first. And I also think that maybe I seem a little 'universal' in the needs/features I would like to implement and address too. And also that it would seem very unrealistic to come 'from the ground up' with a tool that addresses everything.<br>
<br>So, I'm trying to narrow a little the scope and try to reflect this into an updated document. It only adds a section named 'Application Model' in respect to the first but if I'm making my point there, a general purpose tool can be thought as a layer that is useful when someone tells it what to do (quite like a traditional RDBMS or framework or programming language). So, its it could be understood that there be models narrowing this 'universality' but without losing the benefits of a layer of semantics for future integration, merging and maybe interoperability of 'semantic application instances'.<br>
<br><a href="https://cognescent.googlecode.com/files/Brochure2.pdf">https://cognescent.googlecode.com/files/Brochure2.pdf</a><br><br>I also would like to implement this in Java, so I'm describing the initial layout of packages and their functionalities into the Google Code hosted project repository, in a document named 'packages.txt':<br>
<br><a href="https://code.google.com/p/cognescent/source/browse/trunk/Cognescent/src/packages.txt">https://code.google.com/p/cognescent/source/browse/trunk/Cognescent/src/packages.txt</a><br><br>It is far from being more than a draft specification of components and their features. It reflects the partitioning of the proposed software model and where and what could be done. My actual coding time is not much and I'm doing this alone. Whenever updates become available they'll be published. It would be also greatly appreciated if someone can help somehow in the creation of a development team for this project.<br>
<br>Thanks in advance!<br>Sebastian.<br><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 12:08 PM, Patrick Durusau <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:patrick@durusau.net" target="_blank">patrick@durusau.net</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
Quintin,<div class="im"><br>
<br>
<div>On 08/19/2012 07:10 AM, Quintin Siebers
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>Hey,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>We've been working on such a system for a few years now, and
our current version is open to have a look at:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><a href="http://en.mssm.nl/software/kamala-in-the-cloud/" target="_blank">http://en.mssm.nl/software/kamala-in-the-cloud/</a></div>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
Good point but Kamala requires (as any topic map application does)
that you establish what subjects you want to talk about, their
identifies, relationships, etc. Having said that, you can fill it
with whatever content you like. <br>
<br>
My objection to Sebastian's needs/features is their universal
nature.<br>
<br>
If I were writing a topic map for business expenses, it would be
very unlikely to include the rules for receipts written in cuneiform
(the earliest business document is a receipt for beer at an inn).
Not that topic maps can't do that, but most clients are unlikely to
be interested. For that matter, of the thousands of natural
languages in existence, most clients are going to be interested in
only one (1). Topic maps can do more but again, probably not a
requirement. <br>
<br>
You can see where this is going. <br>
<br>
I think topic maps shine brightest meeting the semantic requirements
of actual customers. <br>
<br>
That someone, somewhere, off the Net most likely, is not best served
by my topic map is quite likely. <br>
<br>
But, I am not arrogant enough to presume to act in their best
interest, never having asked what they want, much less their
permission. <br>
<br>
Is the "digital divide"
(<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_divide" target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_divide</a>) the new "white man's
burden? (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Man%27s_Burden" target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Man%27s_Burden</a>)" <br>
<br>
Hope you are having a great weekend!<br>
<br>
Patrick<div><div class="h5"><br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<span style="border-collapse:separate;border-spacing:0px"><span style="text-indent:0px;letter-spacing:normal;font-variant:normal;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;line-height:normal;border-collapse:separate;text-transform:none;font-size:13px;white-space:normal;font-family:Calibri;word-spacing:0px">
<div style="word-wrap:break-word">
<div>Quintin Siebers</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>--</div>
<div><a href="mailto:q.siebers@mssm.nl" target="_blank">q.siebers@mssm.nl</a></div>
<div>(+31) (0)6 - 11 06 16 27</div>
<div><span style="font-size:medium"><br>
</span></div>
</div>
</span>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Morpheus Kennistechnologie BV<br>
</div>
<URL: <a href="http://www.mssm.nl" target="_blank">http://www.mssm.nl</a> ><br>
postbus 69<br>
3500 CD Utrecht<br>
KVK 30 26 04 30</span>
</div>
<br>
<div>
<div>On 19 aug. 2012, at 13:03, Alexander Johannesen <<a href="mailto:alexander.johannesen@gmail.com" target="_blank">alexander.johannesen@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:</div>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">Hola,<br>
<br>
On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 8:52 PM, adasal <<a href="mailto:adam.saltiel@gmail.com" target="_blank">adam.saltiel@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite">Is what you are proposing really
possible from the ground up? I wonder if<br>
even getting an architecture is possible from the ground up,
i.e. without<br>
starting with real world compromises dictated by the job in
hand.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Not sure if what's proposed is possible from the ground up,
but I know<br>
it's certainly possible to create an ontology-based complete
system,<br>
however I doubt "from the ground up" has been defined enough
at this<br>
point. I've worked on creating full-stack application and
systems<br>
delivery framework based on ontologies / Topic Maps, both in
terms of<br>
integration but also as a development tool, and as a way to
infer<br>
capabilities of services based on their entity / resource
rather than<br>
clumsy API's.<br>
<br>
I'm fairly confident that it's the way of the future, but as
you<br>
probably allude to as well, it's still a bit way off, mostly
because<br>
whomever comes up with it first or already doing it, are doing
it in<br>
solitary, much like the TM community watching the spectacle of
RDF<br>
from the side-lines.<br>
<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
<br>
Alex<br>
-- <br>
Project Wrangler, SOA, Information Alchemist, UX, RESTafarian,
Topic Maps<br>
--- <a href="http://shelter.nu/blog/" target="_blank">http://shelter.nu/blog/</a>
----------------------------------------------<br>
------------------ <a href="http://www.google.com/profiles/alexander.johannesen" target="_blank">http://www.google.com/profiles/alexander.johannesen</a>
---<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
topicmapmail mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:topicmapmail@infoloom.com" target="_blank">topicmapmail@infoloom.com</a><br>
<a href="http://www.infoloom.com/mailman/listinfo/topicmapmail" target="_blank">http://www.infoloom.com/mailman/listinfo/topicmapmail</a><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<br>
<fieldset></fieldset>
<br>
<pre>_______________________________________________
topicmapmail mailing list
<a href="mailto:topicmapmail@infoloom.com" target="_blank">topicmapmail@infoloom.com</a>
<a href="http://www.infoloom.com/mailman/listinfo/topicmapmail" target="_blank">http://www.infoloom.com/mailman/listinfo/topicmapmail</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div></div><span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><pre cols="72">--
Patrick Durusau
<a href="mailto:patrick@durusau.net" target="_blank">patrick@durusau.net</a>
Former Chair, V1 - US TAG to JTC 1/SC 34
Convener, JTC 1/SC 34/WG 3 (Topic Maps)
Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300
Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps)
Another Word For It (blog): <a href="http://tm.durusau.net" target="_blank">http://tm.durusau.net</a>
Homepage: <a href="http://www.durusau.net" target="_blank">http://www.durusau.net</a>
Twitter: patrickDurusau </pre>
</font></span></div>
</blockquote></div><br>