Re: [regrep-semantic] proposed 2005 activities]

[Farrukh Najmi <Farrukh.Najmi@Sun.COM>]

Carl Mattocks wrote:

>Folks:
>
>
>At the beginning of the last TC conf - Farrukh, myself and the TC chair
>discussed next steps for the SC. We agreed it was now appropriate to focus
>on item (2)'Create a Technical Note ' An ebXMLRegistry Extension Package
>for .. ' commencing with OWL ontology.
>
>Since the DAPD paper is now published  I hope we can also agree on a time
>table for item (1)  'Using ebXMLRegistry V3 to register & store Web
>Service & Semantic Web ..'.
>
>After the end of July I will be able act as an editor on these items ...
>can anyone else in the  SC community help out sometime 2005 ?
>
>
>  
>
+1 on Carl's suggestion with some suggested modifications below...

Since we last discussed this my thinking has shifted a little from 
"Technical Notes" to "Profiles" of using ebXML Registry for specific
purposes:

http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/regrep/200504/msg00108.html

Profiles define how to use a specification within specified restrictions 
and extensions of the specs being profiled. Profiles
enhance interoperability when the profiled spec is applied to the 
specific purpose for which the profile is intended.

Profles can be defined as a normative spec by a community.

I would like to propose that as we restart our activities within the SCM 
SC that we focus our work to delivering:

"ebXML Registry Profile for OWL Ontologies"

Above proposed profile would provide a normative specification for using 
ebXML Registry to publishing, management, governance, discovery and reuse
of Owl Ontologies. It would define canonical ClassificationSchemes, 
ObjectTypes, AssociationTypes, Roles, Slots, OWL Validation Service, OWL 
Cataloging Service, OWL Discovery Queries etc. to facilitate consistent 
and interoperable use of ebXML Registry as a repository of OWL Ontologies.

Above profile does not preclude defining other profiles for other 
Ontology representations.

It is highly focused on what its objectives are as every profile ought 
to be.

As a starting point, the profile definition could get a jump start by 
building on the work that Asuman and others have done already and published
in great detail.

I much prefer a profile to a Technical Note for these reasons. A TN is 
too fluffy while a Profile is a formal spec.
I anticipate many such profiles of ebXML Registry emerging in the next year.

What do folks think?

-- 
Regards,
Farrukh Najmi

Coming to Java ONE 2005? If so check out Sun's Service Registry at Booth #802 in the Java ONE Pavillion.

Sun's Service Registry Web Site:
http://www.sun.com/products/soa/registry/

Press Release:
http://www.sun.com/smi/Press/sunflash/2005-06/sunflash.20050615.1.html

begin:vcard
fn:Farrukh Najmi
n:Najmi;Farrukh
email;internet:farrukh.najmi@sun.com
tel;work:781-442-9017
url:http://ebxmlrr.sourceforge.net/tmp/DSCN0278.JPG
version:2.1
end:vcard