[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
> NO NO NO NO NO NO ... Didn't quite get the semantics of that... Kind Regards, Joseph Chiusano Associate 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: Ken Laskey [mailto:klaskey@mitre.org] > Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2005 12:58 PM > To: Rex Brooks; Frank McCabe > Cc: Duane Nickull; Matt MacKenzie; Chiusano Joseph; > soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org; danny_thornton2@yahoo.com > Subject: Re: [soa-rm] RE: Resolving Various Policy Languages > with Ontologies > > NO NO NO NO NO NO ... > > At 12:01 PM 10/12/2005, Rex Brooks wrote: > >That's an EXCELLENT idea! > > > >Rex > > > >At 8:13 AM -0700 10/12/05, Frank McCabe wrote: > >>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 > > > > > >-- > >Rex Brooks > >President, CEO > >Starbourne Communications Design > >GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison > >Berkeley, CA 94702 > >Tel: 510-849-2309 > > -- > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > ------------------- > / 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]