[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [regrep] RDF Data Access WG Charter
John, Quite. However - we're crossing numerous bridges - most especially that you need some kind of server to do RDF content. Suddenly its not simple anymore. And I for one wonder why the W3C is setting off down this road - when OASIS already has two specifications in this area - so a third just adds to the confusion - unless as I noted - the plan is to endorse just one of the OASIS specifications and not the other... I smell smoke... DW. ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Gillerman" <john.gillerman@sisconet.com> To: <regrep@lists.oasis-open.org> Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2003 5:31 PM Subject: RE: [regrep] RDF Data Access WG Charter > David, > > I am not sure what you mean here. Are you saying that the RDF Net API > implies centralization of access? Why couldn't distributed servers present a > query interface? > > John > > -----Original Message----- > From: David RR Webber [mailto:david@drrw.info] > Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2003 5:12 PM > To: Chiusano Joseph; Farrukh Najmi > Cc: regrep@lists.oasis-open.org > Subject: Re: [regrep] RDF Data Access WG Charter > > > Joe, > > This is interesting. If the RDF Net API is truely a remote access device, > then this represents a FUNDAMENTAL and huge 180' about turn for > Tim Bernes-Lee and the W3C. > > For the past ten years the mantra has been - NO single point of failure - > ALL content must be locally addressable. Hence all the architecture > around schema parsers, DOM, RDF files and more - where > everything is using URL includes and local copies in memory. > And definately NO stinking registries / remote referencing as the web > must be fault tolerant - hence the DNS system, and multiple routing paths > for content, et al. > > So - if they are changing their position here - then it represents > a major opportunity for ebXML Registry to become a component > in the W3C landscape, especially federated registry. > > However - something tells me that its not that simple - and there > are loads of gotchas - and instead of making it simple and > clean - there's opportunity to make it as complex as possible. > > I wonder what the likelihood of them endorsing an ISO (aka OASIS registry) > specification - of course if it was just an OASIS spec' - that # is 0.00% - > but > now ISO - they already using ISO language codes, et al, so that makes it > interesting.... I'd say # is probably 5.00% / +- 2% > > DW. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Chiusano Joseph" <chiusano_joseph@bah.com> > To: "Farrukh Najmi" <Farrukh.Najmi@Sun.COM> > Cc: <regrep@lists.oasis-open.org> > Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2003 3:11 PM > Subject: Re: [regrep] RDF Data Access WG Charter > > > > <Quote1> > > Do you think that if ebXML Registry version 4 provides first class > > support for publish and discovery of RDF and OWL content that it would > > essentially be providing all the functionality provided by the RDF Net > > API? If so am I correct to assume that it would actually provide a > > super-set of functionality of RDF Net API? > > </Quote1> > > > > Actually, I was thinking of it in the opposite way - that ebXML Registry > > could provide an interface to RDF Net API, in which the RDF Net API > > operations could be translated real-time into ebXML Registry operations. > > Does that make any sense? > > > > <Quote2> > > Also, did you get any sense of whether RDF Net API was on a standards > > track anywhere yet? > > </Quote2> > > > > The only information mentioned was that it had been submitted to W3C in > > October. > > > > Thanks, > > Joe > > > > Farrukh Najmi wrote: > > > > > > Chiusano Joseph wrote: > > > > > > >Farrukh, > > > > > > > >Thanks for this information. I attended an XML 2003 session [1] given > by > > > >Graham Moore (co-author, RDF Net API) that covered RDF Data Access, and > > > >found it very interesting. > > > > > > > >Joe > > > > > > > >[1] "Semantic Web Servers - Engineering the Semantic Web": > > > >http://www.xmlconference.org/xmlusa/2003/thursday.asp#35 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I did not attend that session. Do you think that if ebXML Registry > > > version 4 provides first class support for publish and discovery of RDF > > > and OWL content that it would essentially be providing all the > > > functionality provided by the RDF Net API? If so am I correct to assume > > > that it would actually provide a super-set of functionality of RDF Net > API? > > > > > > Also, did you get any sense of whether RDF Net API was on a standards > > > track anywhere yet? Thanks. > > > > > > Happy new year everyone. > > > > > > -- > > > Regards, > > > Farrukh > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of > the OASIS TC), go to > http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/regrep/members/leave_workgroup. > php. > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > ---- > > > > To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of > the OASIS TC), go to > http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/regrep/members/leave_workgroup. > php. > > > To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of the > OASIS TC), go to > http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/regrep/members/leave_workgroup. > php. > > > To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of the OASIS TC), go to http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/regrep/members/leave_workgroup.php. > >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]