What makes Subject Identifiers (topic maps sense) different from subject identifiers (non-topic maps sense)?
Summary of the argument/answer for the impatient:
| Property | subject identifier | Subject Identifier |
| Identifies Subject | Yes | Yes |
| Resolvable | Yes | Yes |
| Resolution = More Information | Yes | Yes |
| Explicit Information | No | Yes |
Identifies Subject
All “subject identifiers” and “Subject Identifiers identify subjects.
Words, for example, as “subject identifiers,” identify subjects.
Resolvable
All “subject identifiers” and “Subject Identifiers” are resolvable. That is they can lead to more information.
Resolution = More Information
The resolution of a “subject identifier” or “Subject Identifier” leads to information that identifies the subject it represents.
Explicit Information
Resolving a “subject identifier” does not lead to explicit information. Known only to the listener.
Resolving a “Subject Identifier” does lead to explicit information. Known to anyone who looks.
Conclusion: Resolution of “Subject Identifiers” leads to explicit information others can use to understand what subject it represents.
I strongly doubt whether all subject identifiers are resolvable, just consider your example of simple words.
A subject identifier itself does not contain any explicit information imho, only by looking at them in a specific context, they *can* have such information.
If I use the topic map subject identifier http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Country and resolve it, I do not have any more information than using a non-topic-mappish subject identifier of the same name.
Having multiple topic maps sharing such identifiers though allows gathering additional knowledge about these subjects, but the same mechanism applies for any other knowledge representation system I guess.
Comment by Thomas Neidhart — May 17, 2010 @ 5:30 am
Would you prefer “can be resolved” over resolvable?
My point was that subject identifiers/Subject Identifiers “can be resolved.”
Case in point, Egyptian hieroglyphics before the Rosetta Stone. The words “could” be resolved, assuming you had the necessary information. Did not mean they could be resolved at that point.
When I resolve – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Country – I have more information, you do not?
If the knowledge representation system resolves to explicit information, then it is the same as a Subject Identifier in topic maps.
It is the ability of third-parties to inspect the information that results from resolution that makes a Subject Identifier different.
(This puzzled me for a long time as I think of words as identifying subject too. And they do. But the fact they can be resolved and when resolved doesn’t help because that is all internal to me and not something third parties can inspect. You can inspect a webpage (or other explicit information).)
Comment by Patrick Durusau — May 17, 2010 @ 7:32 pm
[…] from my post What Makes Subject Identifiers Different?, let’s go down my four points for […]
Pingback by The Story of Blow « Another Word For It — May 18, 2010 @ 9:41 am