Rex,
Nothing is new under the sun of course - when you
are getting shot at
by natives you always kinda have to wonder
about who sold them the
guns and why, let alone who is on what side, and it
probably does not
matter since what your side is anyway just got
redefined by unseen
politicians who rewrote the lines and the
rules...
Welcome to 2004! It just can't be as bad as
2003 ; -)
DW
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, January 01, 2004 8:38
PM
Subject: Re: [regrep] RDF Data Access WG
Charter
What I found most interesting when Monica connected these two more or
less simultaneous presentation dots was just that they came about
independently, although the WSRP one did influence me to push harder to finish
mine, but they were all collaborations and used current emerging standards in
significant ways.
The serendipity of medical informatics and emergency management employed
through web services shows how all this plumbing can be connected up.
There is much more to come soon, much that I know about, and some I only
suspect, but I suspect very much.
Ciao,
Rex
P.S. I'm in agreement about the conspiracy theory thing, wondering if
there are any unseen connections between the Cthulu of Redmond and SCO's
rather single-minded attack on Liinux. SCO has already denied it, which to an
old ad man sounds like alot like the caveat emptor of the trade: "If ya gotta
say it, it ain't so," while the Miskatonic of the West remains obliviously
silent. One looks for a deadly, black-widowish embrace-and-extend around the
corner. Such fun.
At 6:32 PM -0500 1/1/04, David RR Webber wrote:
Rex,
Excellent info'
! Please feel free to poke your nose in more often! ;
-)
This does indeed
look most encouraging. Clearly we can be in
a position to
provide leadership here - and that would be marvellous.
It's years since I
wrote a serious Hospital drug inventory program on
a PC - but the key
back then was classifying things so that the
right drug was
found for the right circumstance, and that new entries
could be added in
the right places.
Clearly RDF driven
catalogue retrievals from a registry of medical
'stuff' would be
valuable - and especially if it had an AI engine
linked to it - so
that it could "learn" by asserting more RDF based
on user selections
and criteria.
Hoping we can plug
into the W3C process here - to help evolve
a common API based
around SOAP and a non-disruptive set of
functions - that
can seamlessly leverage what we have already
in our
specifications.
Cheers,
DW.
p.s. the thing with
conspiracy theories is they are so much more
interesting - and its a win-win
- you usually find out what is
really happening - even if its
not a conspiracy at all, while
heading off the possibility that it
might become one!
----- Original Message -----
From: Rex
Brooks
To: David RR
Webber ; John
Gillerman ; Farrukh.Najmi@Sun.COM
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
--
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
|