Re: [regrep-semantic] FW: [semanticweb] UDDI and semantics

["Carl Mattocks" <carlmattocks@checkmi.com>]

Kathryn:

Yes we (& UDDI) have identified the need to manage ontologies so that they
may be discovered.

SCMSC have also acknowledged the need to link RDF / OWL 'ontological'
structures with other semantic values .

SCMSC have created distinct 'use cases' to address the above along with
other recognized needs.

cheers

carl

<quote who="Breininger, Kathryn R">
> You may have already seen this (I am still catching up on e-mail).  Is
> this similar to what the Registry SCM SC is looking at?
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Max Voskob [mailto:max.voskob@paradise.net.nz]
> Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2004 7:02 PM
> To: public-sws-ig@w3.org; www-rdf-interest@w3.org;
> semanticweb@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [semanticweb] UDDI and semantics
>
> Hi all,
>
> As some of you may be aware, UDDI Technical Committee is considering to
> add some semantic capabilities in the next version.
>
> I would invite a wider community to review our attempts.
>
> http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/5337/uddi-spec-tc-req1
> 1-14-semantics-20040205.doc
>
> http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/5322/uddi-spec-tc-taxo
> nomies-discussion-20040205.doc
>
> Your feedback is very welcome. Feel free to say that we are on a wrong
> track or that the author had no clue what he was talking about in that
> document.
>
> Cheers,
> Max
>
>
>


-- 
Carl Mattocks

co-Chair OASIS ebXMLRegistry Semantic Content SC
CEO CHECKMi
v/f (usa) 908 322 8715
www.CHECKMi.com
Semantically Smart Compendiums
(AOL) IM CarlCHECKMi