Re: Banging the identity drum again, this time REST-style

Hi Patrick,

[...]
> I really tire of topic maps being described as having "...lost the
> game." 

Yeah, maybe we shouldn't emphasize that too much. But I am also tired
of hearing "Topic Maps still kicking" "Topic Maps (still) alive and
important". Slogans which come up every time the circus .. err .. a
Topic Maps event is in town.

> I really don't know what game we were supposed to have won?

The game of being important/visible/useful.

> The latest I heard from the Linked Data crowd is that subject identity
> is caveat emptor. I suppose that applies to URIs.

I don't deny that LOD/RDF has problems.

[...]
> OK, time to 'fess up. It is possible that any legend I write to treat
> the two data sets as the same, may make the same mistake. But hopefully,
> if I am working from a legend that you wrote and the one that I wrote,
> the odds will be somewhat lower. 

I don't want to spoil the party or sound too negative, but "creating
legends" is nice and fine, but it is theory. We don't have apps that
would make TMRM take of and fly. TMRM is atm mainly a wet dream of
Topic Maps enthusiast. ;)

[...]
> If it makes you feel any better, take note that the SW has spent
> literally $billions only to say you have to determine what subjects URIs
> represent for yourself. I take that as fertile ground for topic maps. 

I feel fine, thanks. Even without Topic Maps and SW :)

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

<https://twitter.com/larsheuer/> Twitter
<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