RE: [regrep-semantic] PR2: Explicit support for OWL Ontology/Class in place of ClassificationScheme / ClassificationNode

[ewallace@cme.nist.gov]

Zachary Alexander wrote:

>I think that this violates ebXML version 1.06 requirements.  The ebXML
>registry should be payload neutral.  I think that this should trigger a
>change in the charter of this subcommittee.  I think the charter should
>be changed to explicitly state that this subcommittee is dedicated to
>creating an OWL based ebXML Registry.

I share Zachary's concerns about practical effects of basing the whole 
registry on OWL.  It was also not clear to me at the last SCM SC telecon, 
what the extent of the proposed use of OWL really was.  All of these things 
need more exploration before a commitment to a design decision like this is 
made.

On the other hand, I don't see that allowing use of an OWL Ontology in
place of ClassificationScheme and allowing reference to OWL Class where
ClassificationNodes are currently used implies creating an OWL based ebXML
Registry.  The most significant change to the RIM suggested by this 
requirement is removal of the constraint on ClassificationScheme-like things 
to have a tree structure.  The words "allow use" in PR2 suggests to me
that ClassificationScheme and ClassificationNode will not be deprecated
by supporting OWL Ontologies and classes in these places in the RIM.

-Evan