RE: [ebcore] Semantic alignment support in CPPA

["Breininger, Kathryn R" <kathryn.r.breininger@boeing.com>]

I will be a few minutes late, please go ahead without me. I will join as soon as I can, the number is set up.

 

Kathryn Breininger

 

---

From: Pim van der Eijk [mailto:pvde@sonnenglanz.net]
Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2010 1:21 PM
To: ebcore@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [ebcore] Semantic alignment support in CPPA

 

As input to this agenda item, we mentioned preparing (listing) some sample use cases of additional types of documentation associated with a document exchange.  

 

Here is a link to a forwarded email from Cristiano Novelli. 

http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ebcore-cppa/201002/msg00010.html

He mentions a few examples of such additional documentation types, including constrained schemas, but also other types of associated files, such as human-readable documentation and stylesheets (e.g. to visualize the XML documents).  There is also a proposed CPA extension element.

 

An interesting recent use case are the UBL customization guidelines:

http://docs.oasis-open.org/ubl/guidelines/UBL-Customization1.0.pdf

It mentions a few types of constraint specification document types: customized XML schemas, Xpath, genericode code lists and the new context/value assocation spec of the codelists TC and Schematron. I guess CPA should be able to reference all of those. (The CVA is described at:

http://docs.oasis-open.org/codelist/cd02prd02-ContextValueAssociation-1.0/doc/context-value-association.html)

 

I proposed a similar way of constraining XSDs for business documents as application of AFDD, in a document I posted to the former CPA TC. It worked with CPA or WSDL by editing the value of the location attribute of NameSpaceSupported element. And the referenced XSDs could be "edited" in the same process based on supplied agreed parameters.

http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/document.php?document_id=30487

 

Dale mentioned the EDIFACT IMPDEF message, which can be used to transfer (free text) implementation information about a message exchange. Here is a link to its definition:

http://www.unece.org/trade/untdid/d08b/trmd/impdef_c.htm

 

David is the expert on CAM, I'll leave it to him to describe how it fits in this discussion.

 

Other examples of requirements I've come across to add constraints to exchange agreements are explanations for what purpose the provided information may be used, a maximum period of data retention (e.g. for privacy-related information), etc.  I guess for the moment these are all special types of documentation at best ..

 

Pim

 

 

 

---

From: David RR Webber (XML) [mailto:david@drrw.info]
Sent: 02 March 2010 17:52
To: Bahareh Heravi
Cc: stephen.green@documentengineeringservices.com; Moberg Dale; Farrukh Najmi; ebcore@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [ebcore] Semantic alignment support in CPPA

Bahareh,

 

This sounds like the right approach vis CPPA.  The OASIS BCM work is actually applicable too.  The "Lubash Pyramid" is a nice way to view the ontology.

 

The SET TC work on OWL is focused on the actual exchange payload content and alignment at that level.  The CAM template offers a "bridge" between the CPPA and the payloads.  At some point I have down to generate the OWL that SET is using from the CAM template definition - just needs a little XSLT magic...

Thanks, DW

 

 

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: [ebcore] Semantic alignment support in CPPA
From: "Bahareh Heravi" <Bahareh.Heravi@brunel.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, March 02, 2010 7:59 am
To: "Moberg Dale" <dmoberg@axway.com>, "Farrukh Najmi"
<farrukh@wellfleetsoftware.com>, <ebcore@lists.oasis-open.org>
Cc: <stephen.green@documentengineeringservices.com>

Dear Farrukh,

Nice to see you here again, I trust you are well.

It might be of interest to you that I am developing an Ontology for ebBP as a part of my PhD project, with the aim of Semantic (Standard based) Interoperation. I am doing it in collaboration with Stephen Green and Fujitsu Labs of Europe.

Best regards
Bahareh
----------------------------------------------------

Bahareh R. Heravi
PhD Researcher
Department of Information Systems & Computing
Brunel University
Uxbridge, Middlesex, London, UB8 3PH, United Kingdom.
Web: http://people.brunel.ac.uk/~cspgbrh

-----Original Message-----
From: Moberg Dale [mailto:dmoberg@axway.com]
Sent: Tue 2/23/2010 4:39 PM
To: Farrukh Najmi; ebcore@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [ebcore] Semantic alignment support in CPPA

Hi Farrukh,

The OWL query support definitely sounds relevant.

The SET TC has also developed OWL ontologies for UNCEFACT CCTS that are
relevant.

David Webber can explain their progress so far to us, and relate it to
his CAM versions of similar functionality. The SET TC has actually been
more ambitious than developing support for simple semantic alignment
constraints/rules and are seeking automatic mapping between diverse
message sets (UBL and GS1, for example) that each have a CC
"conformance."

CPPA just needs to have a survey of existing approaches so that for
version 3.0, suitable containers can be defined to organize the
information that constitutes the agreement on "semantic" conventions
(philosophically viewed, these conventions will of course really just be
more agreements about syntactic rules that we think of as constraining
the intended semantics).

Your explanation of the examples and maybe how to reference the
information (or regrep query for it!) would I think be very useful.

Thanks,

Dale Moberg

-----Original Message-----
From: Farrukh Najmi [mailto:farrukh@wellfleetsoftware.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2010 9:13 AM
To: ebcore@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [ebcore] Semantic alignment support in CPPA


Hi Dale,

Can you tell me what I need to read for background regarding semantic
alignment support in CPPA.
in RegRep 4 we have an OWL profile 2.0 which supports semantic alignment

via the RegRep query interface.

An example use case in weather domain that I am familiar with is:

Find all datasets that have a dataset field matching specified fieldname

OR any other field name that is semantically similar to specified
fieldname WHERE similarity threshold may be specified as a float value
between 0.0 (no similarity) and 1.0 (completely synonymity).

The capability uses domain ontologies along with alignment ontologies to

determine similar terms.

Does this sort of functional sound relevant?

On 02/22/2010 05:05 PM, Moberg Dale wrote:
> Agenda items addition:
>
> semantic alignment support in CPPA. reuse ebBP type? is anything from
> registry relevant? what in CCTS and related repositories might be
> referenced as part of a documentation for semantic agreements? are
> implementation guides needed? test constraints (like xslt xquery
> schematron or cam documents that in effect constitute agreements on
some
> aspect of semantics?
>
> how can all these varied materials be documented consisely and
> accurately?
>
>


--
Regards,
Farrukh

Web: http://www.wellfleetsoftware.com



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php

--------------------------------------------------------------------- 
To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that generates 
this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at: 
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php