[topic_maps] Re: [topicmapmail] Multiple members in XTMassociations

[Jan Algermissen]

Christoph Froehlich wrote:

> There is a subproject of tm4j, called panckoucke, which targets this
> question as well: How to transform fragments of a topicmap into graphs
> that are suitable for visualisation and navigation? 

I still think that a certain set of kinds of such fragments exists that
commonly appear when interacting with a topic map. One example would be
requesting a certain part of a relation hierarchy, such as 'superclass-subclass
staring at topic X and going down 3 levels'.

What do others think?

Actually, I think that such fragment kinds are implicitly part of certain
collections of semantics. While the SAM is one such collection (defining
stuff like names, class-instance, occrrences etc.) there are others that
are also publicly defined, such as Dublin Core semantics. When Dublin
Core semantics are used within a topic map, fragments such as an
'author index' or 'publisher index' are likely to be useful.

Other (still a lot less common) semantics-sets are the various part-whole
relationships (physical, spatial, temporal, conceptual) for example and
each of them also implies one or more fragment types.

IMHO an interesting path forward would be to have topic map servers tell
the clients which fragment kinds are available, thus fostering a 'drill-down'
or 'discovery' based way to interact with topic map servers.

Regarding visualization, it would then be possible to send appropriate
representations of the fragment to the client, maybe as SVG or VRML
(or HTML,XTM, RDF).

Jan