On 7/24/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Greg Knaddison - GVS</b> <<a href="mailto:Greg@growingventuresolutions.com">Greg@growingventuresolutions.com</a>> wrote:<div><span class="gmail_quote"></span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
On 7/24/07, Gerhard Killesreiter <<a href="mailto:gerhard@killesreiter.de">gerhard@killesreiter.de</a>> wrote:<br>><br>> What I am mainly concerned about is the upgrade path if we should drop<br>> this special tree diagramm from Drupal's taxonomy module. How do we
<br>> avoid to screw up the site of somebody using it?<br><br>How about a note in README.txt:<br><br>Dear Users,<br><br>We're dropping support for taxonomies with multiple parents. It would<br>be impossible to guess how you want your taxonomy upgraded because
<br>there are multiple ways to "solve" this problem. Please read <help<br>text distilled from this thread> to see how to fix this scenario.<br><br>Thanks,<br>Drupal<br><br>--<br>Greg Knaddison<br>Denver, CO |
<a href="http://knaddison.com">http://knaddison.com</a><br>World Spanish Tour | <a href="http://wanderlusting.org/user/greg">http://wanderlusting.org/user/greg</a><br></blockquote></div><br><br>Very cute! That is actually what many projects would actually do.
<br>My question is: is it a priority to decide now what to do about this?<br>A detailed discussion involving set theory and library science is required, plus modern tendencies in semantic web.<br>In other words, and this is quite serious, just as Drupal ties in to Web
2.0 in general, the taxonomy must eventually tie in with the two main branches of semantic web work being done today: topic maps, on the one hand, and RDF, on the other.<br><br>The connection with the Dublin Core and RSS attemts to link up with taxonomy suggest that this debate may very well be connected to the whole aggregation question also...
<br><br>saludos,<br><br>Victor Kane<br><a href="http://awebfactory.com.ar">http://awebfactory.com.ar</a><br>