Why not be more precise such as "any tool that can process or produce topics and relationships among them about any possible entity; this has included, in the past, ... and your list...". I would agree you have no reason to be more precise than RDF but indeed, their statement is bloated. Maybe it would be possible from this paragraph to deduce that you have similar ambitions to RDF? paul Le 19-nov.-09 à 18:59, Lars Marius Garshol a écrit :
[Applications which use this media type]
This should rather describe the general categories of applications, like, say, computer aided drawing programs, web browsers, and so on.
Oh dear. That's not easy, since this is a generic format. A lot of the tools which implement it are generic Topic Maps frameworks used to build other tools. Applications based on these have been deployed in everything from web portals, product configuration tools, and e- learning systems to intelligence and police systems.
So I could say "web portals", which is a common use, but it's kind of misleading, because really the *media type* is going to be used by web service interfaces of all kinds.
Would something like the below work?
XTM is a generic data format, and as such is used by a wide range of applications. So far, common applications have been web portals, content management, and e-learning.
You can see an incomplete list of tools here, but I doubt it helps: http://www.garshol.priv.no/tmtools/technology.jsp?id=xtm-10
RDF/XML has similar problems, and simply wrote:
RDF is device-, platform-, and vendor-neutral and is supported by a range of Web user agents and authoring tools.
which is very similar to what I wrote. Some web user agents, like clients of Topic Maps-based web services do use XTM. So maybe I should add that?