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
between them.

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" --
	 Phil Baldwin.