Re: [regrep] [Topic Maps vs. RDF][Fwd: [egov] Re: [huml] The Office of Justice Programs's (OJP) Justice XML Data Dictionay]

["Carl Mattocks" <CarlMattocks@CHECKMi.com>]

I agree with David's statement.  To fully support e-Business each type of
interaction needs to be supported by an appropriate structure. Such as,

Topic Maps to manage an index of content e.g. List of OASIS TC's

OWL Ontology to allow an agent-based registry client to interrogate and
extract classified content e.g. OASIS Registry of Specifications

RDF to declare how an ontology describing all the components of a
particular TC's  specification is related to the OASIS lists of Topics

Z395 to define how the content of multiple federated registries / catalogs
/ repositories can be presented in one result set e.g. Melded content from
OASIS Registry, Public UDDI


 <quote who="Chiusano Joseph">
> On the subject of Topic Maps vs. RDF: The e-mail below is from David W.
> to the E-Gov TC, in May 2003 (I wanted to supply the URL, but the E-Gov
> TC list archive is broken). Here, David states:
>
> <Quote>
> For eBusiness integration RDF is not the right tool.  It's
> more at home supporting topic maps in document
> management systems and networks of conceptual
> linkages and associations.
> </Quote>
>
> Quite interesting...
>
> Joe
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: [egov] Re: [huml] The Office of Justice Programs's (OJP)
> Justice XML Data Dictionay
> Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 21:40:18 -0400
> From: David RR Webber - XML ebusiness <Gnosis_@compuserve.com>
> To: Rex Brooks <rexb@starbourne.com>
> CC: courtfiling-doc@lists.oasis-open.org,"'egov@lists.oasis-open.org'"
> <egov@lists.oasis-open.org>,"'huml@lists.oasis-open.org'"
> <huml@lists.oasis-open.org>,"'emergency@lists.oasis-open.org'"
> <emergency@lists.oasis-open.org>,"'legalxml-intercept@lists.oasis-open.org'"
> <legalxml-intercept@lists.oasis-open.org>,"'legalxml-intjustice@lists.oasis-open.org'"
> <legalxml-intjustice@lists.oasis-open.org>,"'xcbf@lists.oasis-open.org'"
> <xcbf@lists.oasis-open.org>,"Aerts, John F." <jfaerts@lasd.org>
>
> Rex,
>
> Yikes!  No that was not the conclusion I was reaching!
>
> For eBusiness integration RDF is not the right tool.  It's
> more at home supporting topic maps in document
> management systems and networks of conceptual
> linkages and associations.
>
> For eBusiness metadata - the OASIS Registry team is
> developing a CCTS representation in XML for storage
> of nouns and aggregates in the Registry.
>
> This will allow the content in the spreadsheet example to
> be populated as XML in the registry, and then used in
> assembly components such as CAM or a vendor mapper.
>
> XML schemata have limited use in collecting ebusiness
> interchange specifications - they can determine structural
> choices for collections of information - but are weak at
> enabling context driven business rules that track dependencies
> and legally binding validations of content.
>
> Cheers, DW.
> ======================================================
> Message text written by Rex Brooks
>>
> Now that I have looked at it, it makes very good sense, so it is
> logical that it would have been adopted previously. The fact that I
> had not run across it shows that I do not come from background that
> would have exposed me to the practice. However now that I have seen
> it in practice, I believe that it would make a good addition, perhaps
> a best practice for xml-based standards to provide an rdf schemata to
> accompany xml schemata as a more complete specification
> package--making related resources immediately available to developers.
>
> Ciao,
> Rex
> <
>
> 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.
>
>


-- 
Carl Mattocks CEO CHECKMi
Operational Intelligence OEM
-------------------------------
e-Business Agents
Semantically Smart Compendiums
-------------------------------
v/f (usa) 908 322 8715
www.CHECKMi.com