The Topic Map community is once again asking itself why no one really appears interested in the Topic Map standards and associated technologies. Following TMRA 2009 Alexander Johannsen vents his frustation at the community and states
Where is our community?
Who did you talk to? What did you talk about? How was lunch? Show us
some human interactions, dammit!
There just doesn’t seem to be much of a buzz about Topic Maps, and until now I didn’t realise this extended to those intimately involved in the community. As Patrick Durusau states :
If we want a “buzz” about topic maps then we are going to have to create
it. No one is going to create it for us.
And this all follows on from the recent Are Topic Maps Dead” thread.
Now, I like Topic Maps. The standards are mature and intuitive – much more so than other Semantic Web standards – RDF/OWL for example.And Ive always found my dealings with any of the community to be professional and helpful in equal measures. But Topic Maps are in trouble.
A case in point – the Topic Maps 2009 conference is “aiming to reach a wider audience” and whilst registration is cheaper, “most of the conference will be held in Norwegian and most of the case studies will be local”!
Topic Map standards are not gaining traction in the world of the Semantic Web and unfortunately the community seems uncertain on how to address this. Yes, the Topic Map movement is evolving and changing but it feels like it’s contracting. And thats a shame.


