Re: [regrep-semantic] PR2: Explicit support for OWL Ontology/Class in place of ClassificationScheme / ClassificationNode

["David RR Webber" <david@drrw.info>]

Zachary,

 

I do not agree.  There's a distinction between creating implementation mechanisms

that allow a neutral approach, as to the means to do that itself.

 

Afterall - we are using XML, so that is not neutral in the strict sense either!

 

The point I believe is that we do not perscribe what people can store in the

registry itself.  So while we may be using OWL mechanisms - that does not

preclude people storing any content into the registry - and using either the

OWL mechanisms to add semnatics about that content - or using some other

mechanism of their choice.

 

Actually I think we are making the registry RIM to be MORE extensible in

this way - not less!

 

Also - we are entering a phase here - with the noun and catalogue work where

we are suggesting good practices.  Again - these do not preclude other approaches,

but provide a baseline reference for people to measure and use consistently.

 

Perhaps that is the key phrase here - we need guidelines to consistent behaviours

even though the registry platform is content neutral.

 

Thanks, DW.

----- Original Message -----

From: Zachary Alexander

To: 'Registry TC - SCM SC'

Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2004 10:15 AM

Subject: RE: [regrep-semantic] PR2: Explicit support for OWL Ontology/Class in place of ClassificationScheme / ClassificationNode

Farrukh,

 

I think that this violates ebXML version 1.06 requirements.  The ebXML registry should be payload neutral.  I think that this should trigger a change in the charter of this subcommittee.  I think the charter should be changed to explicitly state that this subcommittee is dedicated to creating an OWL based ebXML Registry.

 

Zachary Alexander

The IT Investment Architect

ebTDesign LLC, (703) 283-4325

http://www.ebTDesign.com | http://www.p2peconomy.com | http://www.itinvestmentvehicle.com

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Farrukh Najmi [mailto:Farrukh.Najmi@Sun.COM]
Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2004 9:04 AM
To: Registry TC - SCM SC
Subject: [regrep-semantic] PR2: Explicit support for OWL Ontology/Class in place of ClassificationScheme / ClassificationNode

 

PR2. Explicit support for OWL Ontology/Class in place of ClassificationScheme / ClassificationNode

Allow use of an OWL Ontology in ebXML Registry wherever we use ClassificationSchemes in Version 3.
Allow use of an OWL Class in ebXML Registry wherever we use ClassificationNodes in Version 3.

Motivation: Enable multiple-inheritance which was not possible in ClassificationScheme. Enable use cases 4,5,6,9

-- 

Regards,

Farrukh