RE: [ebsoa] RE: [ebxml-dev] ebXML core components derivation by restriction

["Schuldt, Ron L" <ron.l.schuldt@lmco.com>]

Carl,

For the properties, if you start with the basic premise that Core Components are fundamentally basic data representation types (date, date time, amount, name, etc.) plus allowable specializations or extensions (e.g., cost amount, price amount, tax amount, first name, middle name, last name, etc.) those basic data representation types are the root or top of an ontology of Core Component types. The basic data representation types (date, amount, text, etc.) are the highest level of abstraction for the properties. Each basic data representation type is the foundation for its own ontology.

For the objects, it becomes necessary to force BIEs to a sufficiently high level of abstraction that conceptually they become mutually exclusive concepts in the context of an enterprise. Some basic high level of abstraction objects applicable to any business enterprise include: Enterprise, Product, Document, Person, Process, Asset, etc. Each basic high level of abstraction object can also be subtyped and therefore each is the foundation of its own ontology. For example, Purchase Order Document, Work Order Document, Invoice Document, Contract Document, etc are all types of documents.

I recommend that you look at http://www.ebxmlforum.org/articles/ebFor_20040306.html and also http://www.udef.org/specdoc/UDEFv1pt03-July-2003.htm for the complete list of basic data representation types (properties) and a candidate list of basic business enterprise objects. As suggested in the article, the UDEF tree structures could provide a ready made library of Core Components and BIEs.

I am open to the idea of helping create a use case (storybook) referenced by the ebXML Registry Semantic Content SC. How do you want to proceed?

Ron Schuldt
Senior Staff Systems Architect
Lockheed Martin Enterprise Information Systems
11757 W. Ken Caryl Ave.
#F521 Mail Point DC5694
Littleton, CO 80127
303-977-1414
ron.l.schuldt@lmco.com
 

-----Original Message-----
From: Carl Mattocks [mailto:carlmattocks@checkmi.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2004 3:05 PM
To: Schuldt, Ron L
Cc: Fred Blommestein, van; Chiusano Joseph; Bryan Rasmussen;
ebxml-dev@lists.ebxml.org; ebsoa@lists.oasis-open.org; Decapua, David P;
dsommer@comptia.org; dchesebrough@afei.org
Subject: Re: [ebsoa] RE: [ebxml-dev] ebXML core components derivation by
restriction


Ron et al :

If you are open to this idea please help me produce a (storybook) use case
that will be referenced by the ebXMLRegistry Semantic Content SC.

< that the objects (BIEs) and properties (CCs) of  CCTS can be represented
in an ontology framework >

great discussion guys ...

carl

<quote who="Schuldt, Ron L">
> Fred,
>
> <Fred>Extension capabilities are provided. Any project can, through the
> appropriate channels (contact your UN/CEFACT Head of Delegation) forward
> proposals for new BIE's and CC's to the non-profit UN/CEFACT working group
> TBG17 (harmonisation).</Fred>
>
> How much lag time is possible between the time an extension is requested
> and it gets approved by TBG17? Does the TGB17 Working Group meet
> periodically to review proposed extensions or is it an ongoing process? If
> they meet periodically, what is the frequency? Are the procedures and
> decision criteria published somewhere? Where is the current library of CCs
> and BIEs published?
>
> <Fred>Wrt OWL/RDF, in my experience there are little non-academic souls on
> this earth that really comprehend those standards (so much the same like
> CCTS ;-). I am not one of them (yet). Personally, I would love to see
> convergence between the OWL/RDF ontology work and the CEFACT/OASIS Core
> Components work. As far as I understood though, OWL/RDF is mainly related
> to semi-structured data, while Core Components are applicable to very
> structured data (even an SAP system must understand it ;-).</Fred>
>
> Since you say you "would love to see convergence between the OWL/RDF
> ontology work and the CEFACT/OASIS Core Components work" then perhaps you
> are open to the notion that the objects (BIEs) and properties (CCs) of
> CCTS can be represented in an ontology framework. If that is true, then
> perhaps we have a starting point for further discussion.
>
> Ron Schuldt
> Senior Staff Systems Architect
> Lockheed Martin Enterprise Information Systems
> 11757 W. Ken Caryl Ave.
> #F521 Mail Point DC5694
> Littleton, CO 80127
> 303-977-1414
> ron.l.schuldt@lmco.com
>
>


-- 
Carl Mattocks

co-Chair OASIS (ISO/TS 15000) ebXMLRegistry Semantic Content SC
co-Chair OASIS Business Centric Methodology TC
CEO CHECKMi
v/f (usa) 908 322 8715
www.CHECKMi.com
Semantically Smart Compendiums
(AOL) IM CarlCHECKMi