[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [soa-rm] RE: Resolving Various Policy Languages with Ontologies
Hey, why not have a semantic mapping TC :-) On Oct 11, 2005, at 7:57 PM, Ken Laskey wrote: > One thing I have advocated in work outside SOA-RM (yes, Virginia, > there is another life) is the need to understand what are the > concepts that go into a mapping, what are the properties of a > mapping, and (dare I say) what does an ontology that represents > mapping look like. That very much gets into how one could possibly > do effective mediation. But that is a whole separate topic. > > Ken > > P.S. No, I do not propose we create a Semantic Mapping TC. > > > On Oct 11, 2005, at 7:36 PM, Duane Nickull wrote: > >> This was the base theorem for the Core Components Technical >> Specification (CCTS) which mandates a set of contexts as a >> qualifier for every semantic entity. Even the simplest of data >> elements (FirstNameOfPerson) has different semantics if it appears >> in a PO as //BuyerParty/Contact/FirstNameOfPerson vs. // >> SellerParty/Contact/FirstNameOfPerson. Makes it hard to create >> one size fits all mapping rules. >> >> >> >> This is also why I drew the sinkhole with us staring down at >> semantics ;-) >> >> >> >> Duane >> >> >> >> From: Ken Laskey [mailto:klaskey@mitre.org] >> Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2005 12:03 PM >> To: Matt MacKenzie >> Cc: chiusano_joseph@bah.com; soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org; >> danny_thornton2@yahoo.com >> Subject: Re: [soa-rm] RE: Resolving Various Policy Languages with >> Ontologies >> >> >> >> Mappings cannot always be complete because, as Frank notes, an >> ontology exists for a purpose (or variations of a similar purpose) >> and does not express all possible knowledge on a subject. This >> does not mean there isn't value in a partial mapping or mappings >> among a collection of ontologies. Ideally, if there was >> information missing to which one needed to map, this information >> and corresponding mappings could be formally captured and expand >> the knowledge base for future uses. >> >> >> >> Ken >> >> >> >> On Oct 11, 2005, at 1:24 PM, Matt MacKenzie wrote: >> >> >> >> >> I have adapted a proprietary access control language to xacml, and >> merely mapping concepts was not enough. It was useful, but didn't >> fill in all the blanks. >> >> >> >> -matt >> >> -- >> >> Matt MacKenzie >> >> Development Manager, LiveCycle Registry >> >> Adobe Systems Incorporated >> >> >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> From: Chiusano Joseph <chiusano_joseph@bah.com> >> >> To: soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org <soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org>; >> Danny Thornton <danny_thornton2@yahoo.com> >> >> Sent: Tue Oct 11 13:10:51 2005 >> >> Subject: RE: [soa-rm] RE: Resolving Various Policy Languages with >> Ontologies >> >> >> >> <Quote> >> >> For example, if I have a service that uses XACML policy and another >> >> service that uses EPAL policy, I could resolve the differences >> between >> >> the two policy languages using an ontology for both policy >> languages at >> >> the policy decision point. >> >> </Quote> >> >> >> >> I believe this has already been stated on some form or another by >> others >> >> who have replied, but this looks to me like the job for a "security >> >> policy reference model" (or similar name) that contains those >> (minimal) >> >> concepts that are most central to the domain, rather than an >> ontology. I >> >> see an ontology as a semantic model that may be derived using the >> >> reference model, along with multiple other representations such as >> >> concrete security architectures, UML class diagrams, E-R diagrams, >> etc. >> >> One single reference model begets all of these and more. >> >> >> >> Joe (living in reference model world these days) >> >> >> >> >> >> Joseph Chiusano >> >> Booz Allen Hamilton >> >> >> >> 700 13th St. NW >> >> Washington, DC 20005 >> >> O: 202-508-6514 <= new office number as of 09/19/05 >> >> C: 202-251-0731 >> >> Visit us online@ http://www.boozallen.com >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> From: Duane Nickull [mailto:dnickull@adobe.com] >> >> Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2005 11:50 AM >> >> To: Danny Thornton >> >> Cc: soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org >> >> Subject: [soa-rm] RE: Resolving Various Policy Languages with >> >> Ontologies >> >> >> >> Post from Danny Thornton: >> >> >> >> (he mentions the "O" and "S" words) >> >> >> >> ;-) >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> From: Danny Thornton [mailto:danny_thornton2@yahoo.com] >> >> Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 10:26 PM >> >> To: Duane Nickull >> >> Subject: Resolving Various Policy Languages with Ontologies >> >> >> >> Hi Duane, >> >> >> >> The following is an e-mail dicussion I would like to have >> >> with soa-rm group: >> >> >> >> I have been reading WD-SOA-RM-09 to get an idea of the >> >> terminology/concepts for resolving various policy languages >> >> in a service oriented architecture. Section >> >> 2.2.3.2 of WD-SOA-RM-09 discusses the limits of description. >> >> Section 2.3.1.2 states that an ontology can be defined to >> >> interpret strings and other tokens in the data. >> >> >> >> In the discussions I've had about resolving various policy >> >> languages in an SOA, I've hijacked the ontology concept and >> >> applied it as a general concept for resolving differences in >> >> policy languages. >> >> >> >> For example, if I have a service that uses XACML policy and >> >> another service that uses EPAL policy, I could resolve the >> >> differences between the two policy languages using an >> >> ontology for both policy languages at the policy decision point. >> >> >> >> For section 2.3.1.2 of the WD-SOA-RM-09, does anyone have any >> >> thoughts on expanding the concept of ontologies beyond the >> >> service description's data model? >> >> >> >> Danny >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> __________________________________ >> >> Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> --- >> >> Ken Laskey >> >> MITRE Corporation, M/S H305 phone: 703-983-7934 >> >> 7515 Colshire Drive fax: 703-983-1379 >> >> McLean VA 22102-7508 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > --- > Ken Laskey > MITRE Corporation, M/S H305 phone: 703-983-7934 > 7515 Colshire Drive fax: 703-983-1379 > McLean VA 22102-7508 > > >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]