Learn More
As many cities around the world provide access to raw public data along the Open Data movement, many questions arise concerning the accessibility of these data. Various data formats, duplicate identifiers, heterogeneous metadata schema descriptions, and diverse means to access or query the data exist. These factors make it difficult for consumers to reuse(More)
Both topic maps specifications and literature have implicitly or explicitly presented the standard as 'ontology-agnostic', meaning they are able to support, represent and manage any kind of knowledge in any kind of ontological context, and even independently of the constraints imposed by any ontology. Topic maps are able to express 'anything about anything(More)
Claims for Topic Maps interoperability have been standing so far on formal representation of subjects by topics, and identification of topics by controlled vocabularies or Published Subjects. Those features allow topics to be merged on the basis of common identifiers, leading to aggregation of relevant information or knowledge expressed by characteristics(More)
Exchanging information about a subject with semantic tools, and singularly topic maps, demands both human and computer readable ways of agreement about this subject identity. Since subjects are always addressed through representations, hence agreement about subject identity must be grounded on some sort of representation, be it a name, an addressable(More)
The uptake of Linked Data (LD) has promoted the proliferation of datasets and their associated ontologies bringing their semantic to the data being published. These ontologies should be evaluated at different stages, both during their development and their publication. As important as correctly modelling the intended part of the world to be captured in an(More)