Thinking of the different audiences for promoting topic maps.
Here is my rough cut.
- Experimenters People who like to explore new technologies. Hand authoring to experiment may appeal to them.
- Hackers Computer types looking for serious data sets in topic maps.
- Managers Meeting requirements is the only criteria. Cuddly world benefit, etc., see the marketing department.
I am sure I have overlooked distinctions within each group and entire groups.
I am equally certain that one approach will not work for all groups.
Suggestions welcome!
I believe that topic maps has passed the Innovator mindset people, and is currently being used mostly by Early Adopters. Topic Maps is in my view trying to “Cross the Chasm” into the Early Minority group of users. I wrote a blog article about this about two years ago here http://meronymy.blogspot.com/2008/07/is-topic-maps-trying-to-cross-chasm.html
Comment by Inge Henriksen — May 8, 2010 @ 5:19 am
..that should be “Early MAJORITY group of users”. Sorry, peeps ;o)
Comment by Inge Henriksen — May 8, 2010 @ 5:20 am
Interesting post but I am interested in how to target explanations of topic maps at the different groups within any one of your segments.
Like teaching English, Math, Computer Science, there are different approaches that work better for various students.
I don’t think there is a single way to explain/promote topic maps that works for everyone. It would be ironic if a technology based on semantic diversity had a single strait-jacketed explanation. Fortunately, that is not the case.
Comment by Patrick Durusau — May 8, 2010 @ 5:40 am
To me, topic maps is a technology with a multiple peronality disorder; it can not decide what is its primary value or primary target. If you want to market *anything* you need to figure this out first.
Ok, I agree that topic maps can be used for loads of stuff, but so can Coca Cola; you can clean engines with it, but its primary value is a soda, right ;o) ?
Comment by Inge Henriksen — May 8, 2010 @ 10:25 am
Semantic diversity cuts across all fields of human endeavor. Topic maps are a way to manage that diversity based upon a common principle, that of mapping explicit subject identifications to a common subject representative.
How that works in any particular domain depends on how subject are identified and what problem managing diverse subject identification can solve. Not all problems are problems of diverse subject identification.
Marketing “topic maps” which is like saying you want to market “Newton’s Third Law.” Too vague to be useful.
If you want to market a rocket shuttle to the Moon (that depends on Newton’s Third Law), you might get some takers.
A lot of time has been spent on the theory, data model, syntax, constraints (query is coming), etc., side of topic maps because all had to be done to enable the creation of useful applications of topic maps.
Meeting user needs with applications that incorporate topic maps should be all the basis for marketing that you need.
That topic maps are broader than a particular use case doesn’t bother me.
Comment by Patrick Durusau — May 8, 2010 @ 7:08 pm
I see your points. I just imagine what one should answer when someone that is not a scientist or a techie asks “What is topic maps better at than anything else out there”, or “What does topic maps excel at”. Library systems? Web page information architecture(IA)? Linked data? Visualizing complex data models? Data mining? [Add your own favorite here 🙂 ]
Comment by Inge Henriksen — May 9, 2010 @ 10:43 am
My answer (personal answer, all hats off) is that topic maps excel at enabling different users or user communities to talk about the same subject using their own terms.
The English say “dog,” the French say “chien,” and the Germans say “Hund.” With topic maps, everyone gets to keep their own terminology.
Important because information systems have many “languages” and new one arise every day. Information systems prefer their “native” languages just like regular users.
Topic maps enable information systems to use diverse languages and still allow users meaningful access to data they hold.
How am I doing so far?
To go beyond that (one of the goals of this blog), requires:
1) What problem is to be solved? (if it doesn’t involve semantic diversity, you may need another solution)
2) What are the characteristics of the information system and its data? (subject analysis)
3) What are your choices in creating the topic map? (skill of the author determines if the topic map “excels” or not)
Suggestion: Pick out a specific situation that might be improved by a topic map. Then let’s walk through it, your blog or mine. So we can start to build up a store of examples where we know the pluses and minuses of topic maps.
Comment by Patrick Durusau — May 9, 2010 @ 4:29 pm