[topicmapmail] Contextualized Topic Maps.

[Murray Altheim]

schulz@ivs.tu-berlin.de wrote:
> Tom P wrote:
> 
>>Yes, it is always a question what a "context" is and how one should be
>>represented.  But no matter what, a context must, it seems to me, have
>>to do with relationships between a topic and ....what?  Whatever it is
>>could presumably be represented by one or more topics or associations,
>>and the original topic would be related to the context via associations,
>>I would think.
> 
> In my opinion, a "context" ist more than just a scope, actually is
> knowledge, and may be represented by the same methods. In a tiny paper
> (unfortunately german only) I proposed context to be represented as n-ary
> associations, which somewhat can be compared to Lenats work on
> multi-dimensional representation of context.

As also represented in Cyc microtheories, yes.

> Why so? Because a (concrete) context relates a bunch of topics to define
> it. With TopicMaps you can define both, the meta-layer by typing and the
> definition layer by building "context"-typed n-ary associations.

In looking at current understanding of human cognition and various theories
of epistemology (e.g. Unger, DeRose, contextualism vs. invariantism, etc.,
see links below), I would suggest that it's not simply a bunch (though I
mean no criticism), but a recursively-layered bunch, where any given factor
acting as a context is itself bound by its own layers of context. As you
mentioned about Lenat's work, multi-dimensioned. The question of the struc-
ture of that dimensionality is a bit beyond the scope of this list, but
readings in complexity theory might suggest fractal or other structures.
I've been using a hybrid Faceted Classification system, which to me is the
closest approximation to my own theories on this. (Lately, I've been looking
into theories of forgetfulness, which is an important form of cognitive
filtering that is demonstrably necessary for us to function, otherwise we'd
be overwhelmed by all of our stored experience/knowledge).

> With reification you can use context-relations for scoping or associating
> with context-related topics.

Now, unless I'm not understanding you correctly, simply using a Topic
Map for such forms of representation is itself a type of reification
-- no further layer of "proxy-fication" is necessary.

> Ok, this may sound a bit complicated. But building a context as an
> association gives a stronger semantic to it. Related topics play specific
> roles in a context and by having explicit, context-typed associations,
> one could think of comparing contexts by the bound topics.

I think anything less complicated is simply a toy, which is one of
the criticisms I'd level against a lot of "knowledge representation"
projects, especially those that take no consideration at all of
context, even such obvious ones as time.

> On the other hand, it does not necessitate to introduce new techniques
> or elements to represent context in TopicMaps.

Agreed. The basic graph structure of topics-and-associations provides
the same thing as concepts-and-relations in CG, etc.  It's as I've
said now for years about RDF: people's enthusiasm is misplaced, they
simply like graphs, coming often from the world of trees.

(For myself, I kinda like trees, the kind that provide oxygen and shade.)

If you can provide a translation of your German paper, that would
be great. If not, I'd still be interested in a link to it. I could
possibly struggle through.

Thanks!

Murray

---- references ----

  Contextualism and the Neglected Question of Context, Morrison, J.
    http://www.williams.edu/philosophy/fourth_layer/faculty_pages/jcruz/morrisonthesis.pdf
  Context as a Spurious Concept, Hirst, G.
    http://ftp.cs.toronto.edu/pub/gh/Hirst-CICLing-2000.pdf
  Skepticism, Contextualism, and Descrimination, Schaffer, J.
    http://www.philosophy.rutgers.edu/EVENTS/EPIS2002/schaffer.pdf
  Assertion, Knowledge, and Context, DeRose, K. available from:
    http://pantheon.yale.edu/~kd47/
  The Epistemology Page, DeRose, K. (ed.)
    http://pantheon.yale.edu/~kd47/e-page.htm
  Epistemology Research Guide by Dr. Keith Korcz
    http://www.ucs.louisiana.edu/~kak7409/EpistPapersBySubject.html#Skepticism
......................................................................
Murray Altheim                    http://kmi.open.ac.uk/people/murray/
Knowledge Media Institute
The Open University, Milton Keynes, Bucks, MK7 6AA, UK               .

    LEO (July 23-Aug. 22): When he first invented the printing press
    in the fifteenth century, Johannes Gutenberg used it to fashion
    frivolous little things like sets of playing cards. Only later
    did he put it to work mass-producing books, turning it into a
    revolutionary tool for disseminating information. I foresee a
    similar evolution for you in the coming weeks, Leo. In the early
    going, you'll employ a wonderful new resource in a relatively
    impractical way; or maybe a big, fresh idea will first appear in
    a trivial context. Not to worry, though. After the initial false
    starts and wasteful experiments, you will ultimately discover an
    elegant use for your innovation. Be patient.      -- Rob Brezsny