[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [tm-pubsubj] Range of Application
Peter et al: We are in early stages of the SCM SC life cycle. We have not had a formal kickoff meeting where we will be getting team members on the same page. In a nutshell we plan to build the Semantic Web Server standard for distributed, collaborative development, management and usage of semantic content (not just ebXML). I believe this includes supporting the semantic registration of PSI's. I welcome the thought that our work would be contribute to the goals of a full Semantic Web (?) TC with a broader charter. Note: Formal participation to the SCM SC requires that you be an OASIS member as well as a member of the ebXML Registry TC. cheers Carl <quote who="Peter Brown"> > Carl: > I don't want to be picky, just to get the picture clear. > Is the SemConMan SC an actual TC sub-committee or just a "working group" > of the ebXML Registry TC? It is simply not on the radar anywhere. I ask > because this could be a valid case for bringing it up to a full TC: they > will be those (myself included) who would be interested in SemConMan, but > not 'just' the ebXML registry TC. > In this circulstance, there would be valuable cross-over with the broader > TM-PubSubj objectives > > Peter > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Carl Mattocks > To: Patrick Durusau > Cc: Peter Brown ; carlmattocks@checkmi.com ; Bernard Vatant ; tm-pubsubj > Sent: Friday, January 16, 2004 2:15 AM > Subject: Re: [tm-pubsubj] Range of Application > > > > <quote who="Patrick Durusau"> >> Peter, >> >> Peter Brown wrote: >>> Hi Carl, Hi Bernard.... >>> >>> <quote who="Carl Mattocks"> >>> >Acknowledged - the link is for OASIS members. >>> > >>> >Below is an extract from the charter. >>> ><charter-extract> >>> >The Semantic Content Management SC was established by the OASIS >>> ebXML... >>> </quote> >>> Unfortunately, the link is even for the TC administrator only, not even >>> OASIS members... >>> BTW: the OASIS members area doesn't show *any* reference at all >>> to SemConManSC of the ebXML Registry....??? > > We have requested that web access will be made easier via a link from > OASIS list of TC's > >>> I would be interested in more detail, particularly as there is always >>> the danger of "scope creep": although there are plenty of things that >>> do >>> need to be done, "our" TC is about Published Subjects, not about >>> semantic interoperability through public registration of ontologies and >>> ontological constructs...The SCMSC sounds closer to the "SeeBIG" TC >>> idea.... >>> >> Was not trying to suggest "scope creep", just an observation that >> Published Subjects could be used by a number of different technologies. >> > > Agreed - the members of the SCMSC would probably encourage to facilitate > semantic interoperability through public registration of ontologies and > ontological constructs. > > > > >>> >>> <quote who="Patrick Durusau"> >>> > >>> > What I am thinking is that the definitions should be as generic to >>> the >>> > general concept of PSIs as possible so as to allow for future >>> > deliverables to address the needs to topic maps and other >>> technologies >>> > (or the development of deliverables by other communities for their >>> own >>> > purposes). >>> </quote>. >>> Is this not the tail wagging the dog? Surely business drivers will lead >>> to definition of general concepts and requirements, and *then* such >>> generic definitions can be "narrowed" to specific TM >>> implementations...? >>> >> >> No because no matter how urgent a business driver may be, it cannot >> supply the intellectual content that underlies the general concepts and >> terminology. Such drivers may well influence how soon such concepts and >> terminology are narrowed for specfic cases but that is a different >> issue. >> >> We may well be talking about the same thing in slightly different ways. >> What I think is important is that the concepts and terminology be >> specific enough to be useful but not limited to a particular set of >> uses. Able to be driven to narrower cases by more specific business >> drivers if you like. >> > > Acknowledged - I do consider that PSI's have the potential to add value > many forms of semantic structures. > > > -- Carl Mattocks co-Chair OASIS ebXMLRegistry Semantic Content SC CEO CHECKMi v/f (usa) 908 322 8715 www.CHECKMi.com Semantically Smart Compendiums (AOL) IM CarlCHECKMi
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]