[sc34wg3] Topic maps by another name

[Lars Marius Garshol]

* M.Altheim
>
> To me, rule description languages operate at a level higher than
> Topic Maps' XTM syntax, higher than RDF syntax, higher than any
> TM or RDF schema language, and are up in the clouds of KR models
> where things like KIF live. To that effect, Topic Maps could
> provide a graph foundation for them, and a great basis upon which
> to build interchanges, certainly better than anything based in
> RDF in that respect. I don't see that we've yet built up the
> edifice of the Topic Maps tool belt to be able to express the
> kinds of rules that KIF or the W3C RIF charter suggests.

I agree with nearly everything you write here, except about whether  
the edifice is high enough. I'd guess tolog does what they want,  
unless they want forward-chaining rules. And if they do, it's  
certainly possible to specify that on top of what we have now.

--
Lars Marius Garshol, Ontopian                     http://www.ontopia.net
+47 98 21 55 50                                   http:// 
www.garshol.priv.no