This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C02FC1.F8BC78CE Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" All, Lance Otis wrote: >Topic maps must be multi-dimensional and capable of inversion >so that they are viewable from the top-down or the bottom-up. Or the inside out. There is no top nor bottom; only relationships and their distance from the point of entry or current view. David Martel Manager, Content Management MindBranch, Inc. (413) 664-6185 dmartel@mindbranch.com www.mindbranch.com The new face of market intelligence -----Original Message----- From: Martin Bryan [mailto:mtbryan@sgml.u-net.com] Sent: Friday, October 06, 2000 6:17 AM To: Lance Otis; 'Bernard VATANT'; topicmapmail@infoloom.com Cc: 'Todd Boewe' Subject: [topicmapmail] Re: Context, Meaning, and Topic Hierarchies Lance Otis wrote: > We must acknowledge that there is no one set of ordered topics that will fit > all possible needs. Needs change, view points differ. What is one man's root > is another man's leaf. Accordingly, topic sets must be flexible, adaptable, > and mutable. Topic maps must be multi-dimensional and capable of inversion > so that they are viewable from the top-down or the bottom-up. Any > sub-category must be able to be treated as a top-level category. We must be > pragmatic: build something that works for a specific set of needs, but build > it to allow change and mutation. Well said Lance. I have been having some further thoughts on the relationships between topic maps and ontologies (and Buddhist philosophy!) which I have placed on my website at http://www.sgml.u-net.com/philosophy.doc. Martin Bryan ------_=_NextPart_001_01C02FC1.F8BC78CE Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">Bottoms Up All,
Lance Otis wrote:
>Topic maps must be multi-dimensional and capable = of inversion
>so that they are viewable from the top-down or = the bottom-up.Or the inside out.
There is no top nor bottom; only relationships and = their distance from the point of entry or current view.David Martel
Manager, Content Management
MindBranch, Inc.
(413) 664-6185
dmartel@mindbranch.com
www.mindbranch.com
The new face of market intelligence-----Original Message-----
From: Martin Bryan [mailto:mtbryan@sgml.u-net.com= ]
Sent: Friday, October 06, 2000 6:17 AM
To: Lance Otis; 'Bernard VATANT'; = topicmapmail@infoloom.com
Cc: 'Todd Boewe'
Subject: [topicmapmail] Re: Context, Meaning, and = Topic Hierarchies
Lance Otis wrote:
> We must acknowledge that there is no one set of = ordered topics that will fit
> all possible needs. Needs change, view points = differ. What is one man's root
> is another man's leaf. Accordingly, topic sets = must be flexible, adaptable,
> and mutable. Topic maps must be = multi-dimensional and capable of inversion
> so that they are viewable from the top-down or = the bottom-up. Any
> sub-category must be able to be treated as a = top-level category. We must be
> pragmatic: build something that works for a = specific set of needs, but build
> it to allow change and mutation.Well said Lance. I have been having some further = thoughts on the relationships between topic maps and ontologies (and = Buddhist philosophy!) which I have placed on my website at http://www.sgml.u-net.com/philosophy.doc.
Martin Bryan
------_=_NextPart_001_01C02FC1.F8BC78CE--