Re: Temporal validitity of subject indicators?

Patrick,

Am 08.05.2011 um 22:57 schrieb Patrick Durusau:

> Robert,
> 
> OK, I think I understand what you are saying, but I am hard pressed to see how your "glue" topic maps avoid the problem.
> 
> At some point, some author of the "glue" topic maps has to choose a "local" subject identifier and a "foreign" identifier (one he did not author).
> 
> How is that author any more privileged than any ordinary author to avoid error?

He is not. Anybody can create glue topic maps. And anybody can decide to either load them or *not* to load them into the engine. It is more important that content topic maps can be trusted. In a scenario of reusing subject identifiers, errors cannot be reverted, even when they are discovered. In a scenario of content topic maps and glue topic maps, they can be reverted when they are discovered.

> I freely grant that what ensues is the "Tower of Babel" but then topic maps were never a solution to that problem.  They can only lessen its impact in particular contexts. Among people willing to commit the effort for the benefit of collating information from diverse sources.
> 
> To put it another way, there isn't ever a point a which we have it all "straightened out" and free from error.

I am sorry, but i have to disagree. Most of the things are pretty straight. I get transactions that are meant for me on my account. In a hospital i do get the treatment that a doctor intends me to have. This email will reach you. Most of the things are pretty easy and not sophisticated and Topic Maps can help in all those areas as well, not only when you have five different terminologies for the same domain. But therefore the people applying them have to be fully aware of its strengths and weaknesses. Just imagine the effect a wrong subject identity decision in Topic Maps Hospital system can have.

Kind regards,

Robert