Re: [cam] RDF for CAM?

["Boonserm (Serm) Kulvatunyou" <serm@nist.gov>]

David,

Sounds like an interesting topic here. My opinion is RDF has quite limited
expressiveness to express semantics. We may want to consider OWL. However,
OWL needs special parser to validate as it interpret things (such as xml
schema) a bit differentlly. My immediate thought is since all of this
semantic annotation language use the notion of "resource" which by defintion
should be able to point to any peice of information in the web space (as the
whole file or specific element), one should be able to provide semantics for
each CAM element by referencing.

-serm

----- Original Message -----
From: "David RR Webber - XML ebusiness" <Gnosis_@compuserve.com>
To: "CAM OASIS" <cam@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 7:36 PM
Subject: [cam] RDF for CAM?


Team,

I just want to mention that the idea of adding RDF as a
third option for specifying semantics under the
content reference section is something that I am
seeing we may want to recruit some help understanding.

Right now we have two ways of doing content references,
either using a UID and alias into a registry resource
(can be ebXML, UDDI, SQL, or webservice (WSDL) based),
or as an in-line declaration with schema style datatyping
and traditional facets like minlength, maxlength, etc.

Anyway - just wanted to mention this in case one of you
happen to be sat next to a RDF guru, and we can get
some suggestions and ideas on what this may look like...

Thanks, DW.