Farrukh,
An obvious simple start point is the OASIS BCM
Information Pyramid.
While that is not the whole story by any means - it
does at least
provide an obvious reference point that people can
relate to and
grasp as they start to think about this whole
topic. And it is a
self-contained base point on to whuch you can build
more
(ontologies, et al) as you extend out the
functionality.
Supporting the Information Pyramid as a use case
for registry
should keep the SCM team well busy for the next six months
anyway!
Cheers, DW.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2004 8:57
AM
Subject: Re: [egov] ebXML Registry SCM
(& Semantic Interoperability)
Wrightson wrote:
This subcommittee's described scope is "looking
at how an ebXML Registry can be used to manage semantic content".
There may well be (IMO there is) a lot more to semantic interoperability
than this.
Good point Anne.
It would be very helpful if we could discuss some specific
use cases to illustrate what semantic
interoperability may entail. I am attach
It would be sad to see OASIS work on
Semantic Interoperability constrained by having a
built-in registry perspective.
I agree.
That would be an undesirable constraint.
I had suggested in my email
that Semantic Content Management (SCM) SC will not be enough:
> The
SCM SC would address only the core foundation of vocabulary semantic and
syntax based upon OWL/RDF etc.
> We would still need things like Naming
and Design Rules to be addressed elsewhere.
I assumed that SCM SC
would provide a core infrastructure that enables semantic interop by allowing
content to be described using ontology based meta data.
I was assuming
that there would be other SCs within egov TC and possibly other existing TCs
where the rest of semantic interop was addressed.
For example Naming
and Design Rules could be an SC in egov TC.
Sorry if I gave the wrong
impression.
Another key position I stated in my message was that I was
not sure that a new Semantic interoperability OASIS TC would necessarily be a
good idea. That was based on concern that it could lead to too many
overlapping standards activities all competing for contributors and charter.
What we need is to make the existing TCs work together better
(IMHO).
Of course above opinion is in a vacuum and is based on my gut
feel. It would help to identify the scope of proposed Semantic
Interoperability TC ilustrated with some with use cases to reach an informed
opinion.
--
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/egov/members/leave_workgroup.php.