[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: [Q] RDF API versus creating an ebXML Registry Knowledge Model
Would it be better to create an ebXML Knowledge Model? This document would outline the Semantic/Knowledge Model and facilitate interoperability. The RDF API solution seems like a bolt-on solution to me that doesn’t solve the problem of how to make the registry Semantic/Knowledge aware.
Should the question of API’s be an implementer’s problem or a Registry problem? If we have a Semantic/Knowledge Model that shows how knowledge will be represented natively in the Registry then it is up to implementers too translate any API to the Registry Knowledge Model. One of the problems is that RDF support alone won’t support OWL. There will have to be a separate API(s) to support OWL and/or OWL Lite, OWL DL, OWL Full. I have also seen papers that talk about using “Topic Maps” to represent Semantic/Knowledge. Seems like five API’s right out of the gate.
The IT Investment Architect
ebTDesign LLC, (703) 283-4325