Re: Current state of the discussion around RDF+OWL & Topic Maps?

[...]
> An RDF to Topic Maps mapping should be (or must be) context-sensitive.
> It's not a bug in Topic Maps but a failure in RDF ... or a feature in
> Topic Maps.
[...]

I got a few requests off-list to explain this.

I meant that it is not possible to grab a bunch of triples and
translate them to Topic Maps since you'll get always wrong triples
where a literal is used as object even if the ontology says that it
has to be an IRI. If you reject all wrong triples out there in the
wild you'd end up with an empty topic map. ;)

In the above use case I meant with "context-sensitive" that you cannot
simply state "it's an error if the object of predicate X is an IRI if
predicate X should be mapped to a name". You have to be more lenient.

And even if the mapping B works to translate the RDF source A into
Topic Maps, you'll find an example C where the mapping B does not work
because of "wrong" triples.

Best regards,
Lars
-- 
Semagia 
<http://www.semagia.com>

<http://www.topicmaps.de/mailinglist/> German Topic Maps mailing list
<http://tinytim.sourceforge.net/> Open Source Topic Maps engine
<http://mappa.semagia.com/> Mappa - Python Topic Maps engine