RE: [Tm4j-developers] Drill-down topic maps

[Jack P. <jac...@th...>]

At 06:48 PM 6/26/2001 +0100, you wrote:
><snippage>
>
>For "topic map content types" this would work. For other content types,
>resolving the locator would involve a different interpretation of the
>fragment ID, and it would be nice to have some pluggable way of handling
>occurrences of any type or locator notation (in the topic map) and of any
>resource content type. However, I'm not sure that this is something which
>should be addressed by TM4J - I would prefer to see the development of a
>generic content addressing framework (such as a grove engine) as a separate
>project and integrate TM4J with that. Does anyone know of such a thing ?

Take a look at NODAL being written by Lee Iverson on behalf of Douglas 
Engelbart's OHS project.  View his latest draft at 
http://www.ai.sri.com/~leei/OHS/NODAL-WhitePaper.htm

His goal is something akin to a grove engine, complete with versioning and 
more.

> > Having said this, I would suggest the following interfaces:
> >
> > public interface TopicMapProviderFactory {
> >     public TopicMapProvider createTopicMap( Properties );
> > }
> >
> > public interface TopicMapProvider {
> >     public TopicMap getTopicMap();
> >     public String getURL();
> > }
> >
> > These two interface are necessary to intergrate a topicmap into a system.
> > With getTopicMap() I get the map handled by this provider. I'm not sure
> > if we need getURL() since TopicMap already has a getBaseURL() method.
> >
> > public interface TopicMapManager {
> >     public void initialise(Properties) throws TopicMapManagerException();
> >     public TopicMap getTopicMap(String sourceURL);
> >     public Collection getTopicMaps();
> >     public registerProvider( String providerFactoryClassName,
> > Properties );
> > }
> >
> > The TopicMapManager manages all TopicMapProviders known by a system. The
> > registerProvider() method adds a provider to the manager by using the
> > given factory class.
>
>This is a nice model, it would allow me to combine both in-memory
>(file-based) topic maps and topic maps from a persistent store and from
>other sources (perhaps a "RemoteTopicMap" implementation over SOAP !)
>
><snip!>
> >
> > What about that ?
> >
>
>I would be happy to go with this. I'm on the road at the moment but will be
>back home in a couple of days and able to get something started on this.


All of this is making me think I might just ditch my rdbms xtm package and 
go with TM4J.  One question (off this topic, however) remains: if Ozone is 
DOM based, is it the right package for a graph based universe?

Cheers
Jack