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

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

Carl,

Yes.

But in the context of APIs - no reason why the one API mechanism
cannot be the underpinning - just the content and query details and
information returned will change depending on the task you are
performing.  You may also have operations that are specific to
a domain - so in Topic Maps you may have something like
"getRelatedChildrenByContext()" that would have no meaning
for other metadata access.

Overall though you want a consistent way that this is all
engineered so implementers are having to re-invent the
same wheel multiple ways.

Thanks, DW

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Carl Mattocks" <CarlMattocks@CHECKMi.com>
To: <regrep@lists.oasis-open.org>; <egov@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Monday, January 05, 2004 10:34 AM
Subject: Re: [regrep] [Topic Maps vs. RDF][Fwd: [egov] Re: [huml] The Office
of Justice Programs's (OJP) Justice XML Data Dictionay]


> 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
>
>
> 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.
>
>