Alexander Johannesen writes:
> Anyway, I'm suspecting I don't see what the problem seems to be. To
> create "the best identifier" for things seems a bit of a strange
> notion to me, but is this based on that there is only (or rather,
> that you're trying to create) one identifier for any one thing?
Yes, this is exactly it. RDF things that each concept should have
exactly one identifier; Topic Maps says its fine to have multiple
identifiers. That seems to be 99% of the conceptual difference
My position: it seems obvious that one is the CORRECT number of
identifiers for a thing to have. But since we live in a formal
world, the Topics Map approach may be more practical.
In other words, I might end up _advocating_ Topic Maps, but don't
expect me to _like_ it :-)
/o ) \/ Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]> http://www.miketaylor.org.uk
)_v__/\ "I think it's too consistently wrong not to be fixable" --