Re: Semantic APIs

[...]
> http://www.durusau.net/publications/Semantic-APIs-Durusau.pdf

It seems that Steve N. and Michel understood what Semantic APIs is
about. I still don't get it.

The description of the mapping

    [...]
    A semantic API, at a minimum, repeats the terminology of the
    dataset, with at least one mapping to another terminology, with
    the causes/reasons for the mapping being cited. Semantic APIs
    should be capable of noting mappings to other, related data sets.
    [...]

is rather vague (maybe intentional). But a concrete example may help
me to understand what you're talking about.

Further, I'd like to understand how the Semantic API differs from the
current LOD/RDF approaches.

Probably I should explain why I think that we don't need yet another
WG3 project: WG3 has many unfinished projects (TMRM, SDShare, TMQL,
GTM). Especially TMQL (candidate to be pronounced dead) would have
been very important for Topic Maps. So, instead of yet another project
it would be wiser to finish the homework before attempting to save the
world, I guess. Further I wonder why the ISO label is needed in the
current state of the project at all. If the motivation and vision
attracts enough people, a Subject Maps WG can be founded and the
results could become an ISO proposal. Like WHATWG [1] did for HTML5.

[1]
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_Hypertext_Application_Technology_Working_Group>

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