[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [regrep] Semantic Web Collaborations
This is very interesting work - thank you for sharing your presentation, etc. with us. I can see where the ebXML Registry fits into your overall framework, and would be interested in hearing more about your proposals.
OASIS ebXML Registry TC Chair.
From: Rex Brooks [mailto:email@example.com]
Sent: Friday, February 06, 2004 8:38 AM
To: firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org; Susan.Turnbull@gsa.gov; Owen_Ambur@fws.gov; email@example.com
Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com; geovrml@AI.SRI.COM; protege-discussion@SMI.Stanford.EDU
Subject: [regrep] Semantic Web Collaborations
Dear Colleagues:I was recently asked to write a brief description of a rationale to begin establishing regular liaison connections between entities or bodies working on standards or pilot programs by which the emerging framework of the Semantic Web as envisioned in the W3C can be advanced. In other words, 'It's time to start making the semantic web work in practical, pragmatic terms with concrete examples by connecting previously unconnected resources."
I am sending this message out to the specific resources, bodies and entities that I personally want to connect, so please understand that this message is request for help to make this happen.
If you want to skip the rest of the preamble and get to the nuts, bolts, who, what and how of this message, you can skip to the horizontal rule.
First, let me narrow this request by saying that it is aimed at the leadership of the lists to which this message is being sent but that is not meant to preclude anyone who reads this from participating, especially those whose suggestion prompted this message. Any of us can act as informal liaisons or contribute in any number of ways, but I do want to move toward some more formal relationships to enable a regular exchange of information at the least, and, at best, active participation in new and existing projects and pilot programs as well.
That said, there are several facts I want to note. This effort to describe the interconnections that are now ready to be made in liaisons and collaborations that will benefit and advance the work of all parties revolves first around my own participation in the OASIS Emergency Management Technical Committee, then the Web Services for Remote Portlets, WSRP, and HumanMarkup TCs, and then my potential participation in the E-Gov TC.
As co-chair of the HumanMarkup TC, I can say that we identified our own requirement for a liaison with the E-Gov TC from its inception, but have not had success in finding someone capable of following through with such a commitment, and so I have decided to do this myself, and curtail other commitments to enable this, perhaps by serving as liaison to both the Emergency Management and HumanMarkup TCs.
I also envision working with both the ebXML Registry TC and the Content Assembly Mechanism TC. The ebXML Registry TC has a Semantic Content Management Subcommittee which may be of specific interest and use in connecting with E-Gov TC, which has identified a requirement to address the need for a Semantic Content Management Mechanism of some sort.
A note on my personal history may help put this into a more complete context. I co-founded the Content Development Working Group of the Web3D Consortium in 1998, when it was named The VRML Consortium. I joined HumanMarkup work as it was forming in order to develop a high level authoring language capable of being used to provide standard behaviors for real-time representation of 3D humans on the web, and this remains my long term goal. I recently became involved with Emergency Management because it is a natural extension of my work to provide geospatially accurate 3D depictions of emergency environments in real time. These are, of course, longer term goals as opposed to what we can provide more immediately in the next few years. So, this is a consistent thread in my own work since I first began working on standards for my own work.
As an example of the kind of work I envision, I offer the 60-slide presentation accompanied by a 27-page paper, I made on behalf of the OASIS HumanMarkup TC, and Humanmarkup.org, Inc., the 501(c)(3) Non-Profit Corporation to educate and foster development of the Human Markup Language, of which I am the volunteer Executive Director. The ultimate product of the collaboration described was a (WSRP 1.0/JSR 168 conformant) Web Services-based Public Healthcare Preparedness Portal using the Common Alerting Protocol, CAP, developed by the Emergency Management TC, shown in slide 59:
Realizing the Semantic Web:
The W3C released the most current RDF and OWL specifications December 15, 2003. OWL is the Web Ontology Language and RDF is the Resource Descritpion Framework, and together they comprise the fundamental specifications which specifically enable inference engines and, therefore, allow the Semantic Web to begin developing in earnest.
OWL Semantics and Abstract Syntax:
OWL Web Ontology Language Test Cases:
OWL Use Cases and Requirements:
RDF/XML Syntax Specification (Revised)
RDF Vocabulary Description Language 1.0: RDF Schema
Resource Description Framework (RDF): Concepts and Abstract Syntax
RDF Test Cases
The Stanford Medical Informatics Groups recently released Protege 2.0, a working Knowledge Base and Ontology Building open source application project, which has both an OWL Plugin and an RDF Plugin.
This gives us a set of languages and a toolkit to use to build applications realizing practical, working applications of the Semantic Web.
Disclaimer: all of these components are recent, though they have been in development for several years, but should not be expected to display error-free or mature reliability.
My personal short term goal at this point in time is to develop an extension of the Portal developed in the presentation given to the EA Collaboration Expedition Workshop #30 cited above, perhaps including, or being included within an extended format with the presentation given by ebXML Registry Services to XML 2003 in December in Philadelphia, PA.
The very extensive collaborations represented in the presentations given at the EA Workshop and XML 2003 illustrate the breadth of standards and organizations which can interoperate using the principles on which the Semantic Web is based. Moving this further can be facilitated by adding a few more components such as the the Web Services Business Process Execution Language, WSBPEL, and the Web Services Choreography Language which is under development by W3C.
To be specific about the entities which I would like to see involved in active liaisons, I offer this list:
OASIS Content Assembly Mechanism TC
OASIS ebXML Registry TC
ebXML Registry Semantic Content Management SC
OASIS e-Government TC
OASIS Emergency Management TC
EM GIS SC
EM Infrastructure Framework SC
EM Messages and Notification SC
OASIS Web Services Business Process Execution Language TC
OASIS Web Services for Remote Portlets TC
My wish list for extra-OASIS participants:
W3C Web Services Choreography Working Group
Stanford Medical Informatics--Protege
Web3D Consortium Geovrml Working Group
This does not mean that I do not think other groups ought to be included, but I am somewhat more focused on the emergency management application area in order to deliver immediately understandable, and global/pan-human benefits in any demonstration projects that might be developed.--Rex Brooks
GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison, Berkeley, CA, 94702 USA, Earth
Email: firstname.lastname@example.orgTel: 510-849-2309Fax: By Request