RE: [oasis-charter-discuss] Re: Proposed Charter for OASIS SET TC

["Barnhill, William CTR USAF AFMC AFRL/RIGA" <William.Barnhill.ctr@rl.af.mil>]

Hi,

This looks fascinating, but wouldn't there be a lot of overlap with XRI
Data Interchange Technical Committee (XDI TC)?  XDI is developing a
mechanism that may achieve all of the goals of the charter as I
understood it, at first pass. I haven't done a write up of a detailed
comparison yet though. I'd like to first provide the XDI charter for
reading 
( http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/xdi/charter.php ) and request one
of the SET TC sponsors to let me know how to end-goals are different
from XDI?

Thanks,
Bill Barnhill
Booz Allen Hamilton
XDI TC Co-Chair, OASIS TAB member



________________________________

From: carl mattocks
Sent: Tue 5/13/2008 11:07 AM
To: Eckenfels. Bernd
Cc: oasis-charter-discuss@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [oasis-charter-discuss] Re: Proposed Charter for OASIS SET
TC


I agree with the statement  "SET Process and Semantic Model" would be
easily applicable to legacy formants, EDI or Inhouse ..
 
However, I believe a semantic domain scoped by UBL / CCTS is an
excellent and pragmatic goal for the first version of a SET. 
 
highest regards
 
carl
 
On 5/13/08, Eckenfels. Bernd <B.Eckenfels@seeburger.de> wrote: 

	Hello,
	
	I want to comment on the Scope of the SET TC Charter in regards
to the
	close/strict relationship with Core Components. I think the
major semantic
	modelling work and a framework to describe that is quite
independend from
	the actual data representation. A "SET Process and Semantic
Model" would be
	easyly applicable to legacy formants, EDI or Inhouse.
	
	I therefore would propose to add this as a secondaryx goal, or
to weaken the
	focus, to allow the TC to determine if they only want to support
CCs or not.
	...........................................................
	 For this purpose, first a UBL "Component
	Ontology" will be developed.
	
	
	In the later phases, this ontology will be expanded to cover
other document
	standards based on CCTS.
	The Component Ontology serves two major purposes:
	
	.       Representing the semantics of components: Document
customization
	takes
	place at the level of individual types and elements; hence,
translation
	needs to be done at the same level. When an automated process
compares two
	versions of a schema, it needs to be able to identify
corresponding elements
	in these schemas.
	When document elements are represented as classes of a common
component
	ontology, it becomes possible to utilize that ontology for the
computation
	of similarities between elements from different schemas.
	
	.       Representing the structure of document schemas: Core
component based
	document schemas are complex hierarchies including numerous
types and
	elements any of which might be modified through customization. 
	
........................................................................
.........................................................

 
 
Carl Mattocks


	-- 
	Chair OASIS Business Centric Methodology TC
	co-Chair (ISO/TS 15000) ebXMLRegistry Semantic Content SC
	Ontolog ONION Cop Leader
	VP Berkeley Town Underwater Search & Rescue Unit
	CEO CHECKMi 
	vmail (usa) 908 322 8715
	CarlMattocks@checkmi.com
	http://www.checkmi.com/
	CHECKMi:Mate Semantically Savvy Agents