RE: Re: Facet algebra

>It's not. Instead, you could try expressing your data in RDF or XTM (XTM
>should work). XFML was designed to be a very basic format, that's why
>it's called XFML Core. There was always the idea that, if I went much
>beyond that, I'd be re-inventing XTM and that wouldn't make much sense.

thanks this help... yes XTM was the first I looked at. But I found it too
restricting
at that point. This may be because my not understanding or seeing the
possibility to
extend it. I simply have to learn about stuff more including RDF/DAML and
certainly
revisit XTM. Up to know I did not have properly structured vocabulary to be
able to
really test any markup.

As you well know existing knowledge facetted classification all comes as
bunch of
poorely structured text which can pile up to between 10.000 to 66.000
concepts: depend
which classification you talk about.
It first take some time to "untie the data knots", then you finish by
weeding out
exceptions and 'original solutions'...you come to the point of
facet hierarchy when it says: 'further divide as XY' or add 'aphabetical'
extension.
Not to mention what we call syndhetic structure i.e. linking between
concepts 'see also XY'
or 'alternative facets'.



aida



------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
ReplayTV: CNet Ranked #1 over Tivo!
Instant Replay & Pause live TV.
Special Sale: 50% off!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/G93ZAD/.5qGAA/ySSFAA/0bmwlB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

----------
Thanks for playing. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]

 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/