uddi-spec message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: RE: [uddi-spec] Action Items - 12 Apr TC Telecon
- From: John Colgrave <colgrave@uk.ibm.com>
- To: "Luc Clement" <luc.clement@systinet.com>, Tony.Rogers@ca.com
- Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 11:25:15 +0100
I shall not be able to participate in
the call.
I have thought about the possibilities
for a Technical Note for the OWL taxonomy work and I have reached the conclusion
that support for OWL will have to be introduced as part of a future version
of the specification.
Even if we disregard the idea of having
a single ontology per node/registry and just consider using OWL to define
a simple UDDI taxonomy, there would only be any value in this if UDDI implementations
changed to support it. There would be no change in the way that people
used the UDDI API and data structures, which seems to be the antithesis
of a Technical Note.
Regards,
John
--------------------------------------------------
John Colgrave
IBMS/MIME Cryptographic Signature
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]