On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 14:33, stuart yeates <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> That's not an entirely useful comparison on topic maps and RDF.

If I indented to be useful I'd write something substantial, backed up
with stuff other than humour. I'll give that a go the next time. :)

> We currently use topic maps, alot, in our infrastructure. If we were
> starting again tomorrow, I'd advocate using RDF instead, mainly because of
> the much better tool support and take-up.

Hmm, not a good thing at all. Could you elaborate, though, as I use it
too as part of infrastructure too, and wouldn't touch RDF / SemWeb
without a long stick? I'm into application semantics and shared
knowledge-bases. What are you guys doing where you feel the support
and tools are lacking? And what are the RDF alternatives?


 Project Wrangler, SOA, Information Alchemist, UX, RESTafarian, Topic Maps
------------------------------------------ --------