[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] Indexes: Main | Date | Thread | Author

Re: [ba-ohs-talk] FOHM--the Fundamental Open Hypertext Model

> What's particularly curious (for me) is the resemblance to topic maps.
> strikes me that their "contexts" are a topic map's "scopes", though
> maps don't do "behaviors."  FOHM appears to be association-centric,
> topic maps appear to be topic-centric.    (01)

I'd agree with that.    (02)

>From the FOHM description page it looks like most publication on
FOHM stopped around the time HyTime '97 came out.    (03)

But the last DTD published was
td    (04)

And Auld Linky seems to be continuing under the Equator workshops (see
now at v.0.72    (05)

It's the project of David Millard, who is a Research Fellow in the same
Univ. of Southampton
dept. where a postgrad by the name of Graham D. Moore used to spend some
http://www.iam.ecs.soton.ac.uk/people/people_full_list.html    (06)

Dr. Millard's main project seems to be the Equator workshops
where Auld Linky is a project.    (07)

Ask Graham?    (08)

There are some interesting papers here too:
Notably:    (09)

On Hyperstructure and Musical Structure    (010)

Accepted at HT02, Maryland, USA.    (011)

Abstract : In this paper we report on an ongoing investigation into the
relationship between musical structure and hyperstructure, based on a
series of open hypermedia systems research projects that have featured
case studies involving musical content. Drawing on these example
systems, we consider techniques for building hyperstructure from musical
structure and, conversely, building musical structure from
hyperstructure. Additionally we describe an experiment in the
sonification of hyperstructure.
--Submitted in 2002. PDF download (but my browser crashed trying to
download it so I haven't read it yet).    (012)

Great minds think alike (a bit later on)
Ask Steve Newcomb?    (013)

Peter    (014)

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jack Park" <jackpark@thinkalong.com>
To: <ba-ohs-talk@bootstrap.org>
Sent: Sunday, May 12, 2002 4:51 PM
Subject: [ba-ohs-talk] FOHM--the Fundamental Open Hypertext Model    (015)

description.html (one of dozens  of pages <~1030> when you google FOHM)
> Excerpts:
> "The Fundamental Open Hypertext Model (FOHM) [6] grew out of the Open
> Hypermedia Protocol (OHP) developed by the Open Hypermedia Systems
> Group (OHSWG) but it expands the OHP data model to describe a broader
> of hypermedia "domains". FOHM also makes no assumptions about the
> it is running over or the systems that are using it. It is a model for
> describing hypertext structures that requires binding to a syntax
before it
> can be used"
> "In its work on interoperability, the OHSWG considered the
requirements of
> several domains of hypertext. The three most frequently mentioned were
> Navigational, Spatial and Taxonomic Hypertext. The OHP protocol was
> more concerned with Navigational Hypertext, however FOHM is capable of
> expressing all three domains. Before we can examine FOHM it is
necessary to
> define these domains.
> Navigational Hypertext is the most traditional domain of hypertext,
> exemplified in Open Hypermedia Systems such as Chimera[1], DHM[3],
> HyperForm[11], Microcosm[2] and the HB/SP series[9]. Authors create
> between parts of documents that are related. Users can then click on
> links to move between documents. Although Navigational Hypertext
> can be quite sophisticated, by far the most popular system, the World
> Web, is also one of the simplest.
> Spatial Hypertext systems allow users to organise their information
> visually in a process known as "Information Triage"[5]. Relationships
> between nodes are expressed by their visual characteristics such as
> proximity, colour or shape. This results in visual collections, or
> such as lists and sets. Spatial hypertext systems are therefore ideal
> an evolving organisation of data. Examples of such systems include
> and CAOS[8].
> Taxonomic Hypertext is the organisation of information artifacts into
> Categories[7]. Where authors disagree about the categorisation, the
> Taxonomy can branch into different Perspectives[10]. Applications can
> users to navigate the information space by moving between overlapping
> Categories and can also reason about the relationships that artifacts
> with one another. "
> "In FOHM we describe four first-class objects that are analogous to
> objects in the OHP data model. Associations are structures that
> relationships between Data objects. These Data objects are wrappers
for any
> piece of data that lies outside of the scope of the model. They
> represent a document although one could represent any file, stream or
> item. It is exactly this feature that we shall use to make links
> concepts and queries. Data objects are not directly placed in the
> Associations. Instead Reference objects are used, these either point
> Data objects in their entirety or at parts of those Data objects, for
> example the second paragraph of a text document, or the second scene
of a
> film. They are attached to the Association object via Bindings. Each
> Association also has a structure type and a feature space; each
> must state its position in that feature space, effectively stating how
> is bound to the Association's structure. "
> "Where the FOHM model differs from other open hypermedia models is in
> placement of context at the heart of the information. Context is left
as an
> opaque object within the FOHM model with the specifics being defined
by the
> implementation.
> Context objects can be attached to all parts of the FOHM structure
> "In addition to context, behaviour objects can also be attached to the
> different parts of the FOHM data structures. Like context objects,
> behaviour objects are also opaque. Unlike context objects however the
> implementation of the FOHM model is not required to understand the
> of the behaviour object..."
> Originally, according to the Hypertext 2001 proceedings, there was an
> implementation called "Auld Leaky."  Now, it is known as "Auld Linky"
> http://www.equator.ecs.soton.ac.uk/technology/linky/linky.shtml
> complete with downloads (it's Perl, I don't yet know the license).
> What's particularly curious (for me) is the resemblance to topic maps.
> strikes me that their "contexts" are a topic map's "scopes", though
> maps don't do "behaviors."  FOHM appears to be association-centric,
> topic maps appear to be topic-centric.  I'd really like to see what
> think about FOHM.
> Cheers!
> Jack
>    (016)