----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, January 01, 2004 11:34
AM
Subject: Re: [regrep] RDF Data Access WG
Charter
Gentlebeings,
Please excuse a lurker sticking his nose in where it probably doesn't
belong. I am in the early stages of considering a possible liaison through
Farrukh via Monica Martin for some projects that would demonstrate various
aspects of Web Services Interoperability combining the recent previous
presentations.
The one that I assume you are familiar with was made by Farrukh on an
epidemic health care scenario in a public healthcare demonstration at XML 2003
that integrated BPSS, CPPA, XACML, ebXML Reg/Rep and ebMS.
It would also include the presentation made by Rich Thompson on Enabling Interactive,
Presentation-Oriented Content Services Through the WSRP Standard also at XML
2003.
The third existing current
presentation under consideration is my presentation at the Enterprise
Architecture Collaboration Expedition Workshop #30 produced by Susan Turnbull
of GSA at NSF Dec 9 on
"Incubating New Kinds of
Collaborations through Emerging XML/RDF Technologies: Proof of Concept for
Public Healthcare Preparedness Portal for the New York Academy of
Medicine using the Common Alerting Protocol " This used CAP and
WSRP/JSR168 in a Portal hosted by Oracle Corporation and demonstrated the CAP
API being tested through Disaster Management Interoperability Services
(DMIS).
http://ua-exp.gov/QuickPlace/ua-exp/Main.nsf/h_12CDF5C6107594FD85256DEF0073C0BA/B6211857396EBE3485256DF6007B83A8/?OpenDocument
(It's a 60-slide presentation
athough the animations don't play and the accompanying paper is 27 pages, so I
thought I should warn you.)
This is all capable of being
combined in a way that can also demonstrate the utlity of XML/RDF/OWL, and I
would hope to recruit someone from the Topic Maps camp, but the primary reason
I wanted to reply to this last previous message in this thread is that I don't
think we're at a stage where the concern over IBM and Microsoft stampeding in
a specific direction needs to be raised.
I think it might be useful to
read the submission:
http://www.w3.org/Submission/rdf-netapi/
It is proposing an API that
amounts to a standardization of the protocol using SOAP and HTTP
bindings. It says nothing about UDDI or ebXML, nor about registries at all Of
course, anything that uses SOAP will almost certainly be bound to registries.
It does specify some operations, which would inevitable need to be included in
future versions of UDDI and ebXML registries.
However, as much as I love
conspiracy theories, I doubt the work has gotten to the stage of UDDI
pre-empting ebXML, and as Farrukh can attest, WSRP is hip deep in making sure
ebXML is properly supported, which is something I have had occasion to remind
those who are naturally eager to simplify their own lives by promoting UDDI as
if it were the only available registry resource. The WSRP SC responsible for
that work is WSRP-pfb (for Publish-Find-Bind) if you are interested, but,
thankfully, I'm not tasked with that. I get to slog through Markup, but that
is a whole 'nother story.
If Farrukh can be in contact
with the W3C WG responsible for this particular activity and get an
update on the work, I would certainly appreciate it since I happen to be
chewing through the OWL material released Dec. 15. And I have a lot of
questions about how these semantic web servers are envisioned to
work.
It makes me wonder if this
mountainous mess of material started out as short and apparently simple as
rdf-netapi above?
I bet it did, same as the
originally simple proposals for XML.
Those were the
days,
Rex
At 5:57 PM -0500 12/31/03, David RR Webber wrote:
John,
Quite. However - we're
crossing numerous bridges - most especially
that you need some kind of
server to do RDF content. Suddenly its
not simple anymore.
And I for one wonder why the W3C is setting
off down this road - when
OASIS already has two specifications in
this area - so a third just adds to the
confusion - unless as I noted -
the plan is to endorse just one of the
OASIS specifications and not
the other... I smell
smoke...
DW.
----- Original Message -----
From: "John
Gillerman" <john.gillerman@sisconet.com>
To:
<regrep@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2003
5:31 PM
Subject: RE: [regrep] RDF Data Access WG Charter
>
David,
>
> I am not sure what you mean here. Are you
saying that the RDF Net API
> implies centralization of access? Why
couldn't distributed servers present
a
> query
interface?
>
> John
>
> -----Original
Message-----
> From: David RR Webber [mailto:david@drrw.info]
>
Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2003 5:12 PM
> To: Chiusano Joseph;
Farrukh Najmi
> Cc: regrep@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: Re:
[regrep] RDF Data Access WG Charter
>
>
>
Joe,
>
> This is interesting. If the RDF Net API is truely
a remote access device,
> then this represents a FUNDAMENTAL and huge
180' about turn for
> Tim Bernes-Lee and the W3C.
>
> For
the past ten years the mantra has been - NO single point of failure
-
> ALL content must be locally addressable. Hence all the
architecture
> around schema parsers, DOM, RDF files and more -
where
> everything is using URL includes and local copies in
memory.
> And definately NO stinking registries / remote referencing
as the web
> must be fault tolerant - hence the DNS system, and
multiple routing paths
> for content, et al.
>
> So - if
they are changing their position here - then it represents
> a major
opportunity for ebXML Registry to become a component
> in the W3C
landscape, especially federated registry.
>
> However -
something tells me that its not that simple - and there
> are loads of
gotchas - and instead of making it simple and
> clean - there's
opportunity to make it as complex as possible.
>
> I wonder what
the likelihood of them endorsing an ISO (aka OASIS registry)
>
specification - of course if it was just an OASIS spec' - that # is
0.00%
-
> but
> now ISO - they already using ISO language codes, et
al, so that makes it
> interesting.... I'd say # is probably 5.00% /
+- 2%
>
> DW.
>
> ----- Original Message
-----
> From: "Chiusano Joseph"
<chiusano_joseph@bah.com>
> To: "Farrukh Najmi"
<Farrukh.Najmi@Sun.COM>
> Cc:
<regrep@lists.oasis-open.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2003
3:11 PM
> Subject: Re: [regrep] RDF Data Access WG
Charter
>
>
> > <Quote1>
> > Do you
think that if ebXML Registry version 4 provides first class
> >
support for publish and discovery of RDF and OWL content that it
would
> > essentially be providing all the functionality provided
by the RDF Net
> > API? If so am I correct to assume that it would
actually provide a
> > super-set of functionality of RDF Net
API?
> > </Quote1>
> >
> > Actually, I was
thinking of it in the opposite way - that ebXML Registry
> > could
provide an interface to RDF Net API, in which the RDF Net API
> >
operations could be translated real-time into ebXML Registry
operations.
> > Does that make any sense?
> >
> >
<Quote2>
> > Also, did you get any sense of whether RDF Net
API was on a standards
> > track anywhere yet?
> >
</Quote2>
> >
> > The only information mentioned was
that it had been submitted to W3C in
> > October.
>
>
> > Thanks,
> > Joe
> >
> > Farrukh
Najmi wrote:
> > >
> > > Chiusano Joseph
wrote:
> > >
> > > >Farrukh,
> > >
>
> > > >Thanks for this information. I attended an XML
2003 session [1] given
> by
> > > >Graham Moore
(co-author, RDF Net API) that covered RDF Data Access,
and
> >
> >found it very interesting.
> > > >
> > >
>Joe
> > > >
> > > >[1] "Semantic Web
Servers - Engineering the Semantic Web":
> > >
>http://www.xmlconference.org/xmlusa/2003/thursday.asp#35
> >
> >
> > > >
> > >
> > > I did
not attend that session. Do you think that if ebXML Registry
> >
> version 4 provides first class support for publish and discovery
of
RDF
> > > and OWL content that it would essentially be
providing all the
> > > functionality provided by the RDF Net
API? If so am I correct to
assume
> > > that it would
actually provide a super-set of functionality of RDF Net
> API?
> > >
> >
> Also, did you get any sense of whether RDF Net API was on a
standards
> > > track anywhere yet? Thanks.
> >
>
> > > Happy new year everyone.
> > >
>
> > --
> > > 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/regrep/members/leave_workgroup.
>
php.
>
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
>
----
>
>
> > 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/regrep/members/leave_workgroup.
>
php.
>
>
> 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/regrep/members/leave_workgroup.
>
php.
>
>
> 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/regrep/members/leave_workgroup.php.
>
>
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/regrep/members/leave_workgroup.php.
--
Rex Brooks
GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison, Berkeley,
CA, 94702 USA, Earth
W3Address: http://www.starbourne.com
Email:
rexb@starbourne.com
Tel: 510-849-2309
Fax: By Request