[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Proposal for UBL Ontology Project

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Farrukh Najmi <farrukh.najmi@xxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2003 12:55:19 -0500
Message-id: <3E64E887.3080706@xxxxxxx>

MDaconta@xxxxxxx wrote:    (01)

> In a message dated 3/3/2003 10:58:11 AM US Mountain Standard Time, 
> farrukh.najmi@xxxxxxx writes:
>> I would like to propose that the proposed UBL ontologies be managed
>> using ebXML Registry as an Ontology Server. There are many interesting
>> features that an ebXML Registry has to offer as an ontology server. A
>> partial list includes:
> This is interesting as I have not thought of the ebXML registry as
> an Ontology server.      (02)

Michael,    (03)

You are correct in pointing out that ebXML Registry as defined is not an 
Ontology inference engine. More specific Ontology support is being 
planned for V4 of ebXML Registry (V3 will soon be approved by TC).    (04)

However, it is a general purpose content management system that can be 
used to manage any type of content. Specific information models (e.g. 
OWL) may be mapped to ebXML Registry using binding.    (05)

> For example, I do not believe the RIM supports
> the formal notion of 'subclassOf" which would be critical.  While I
> believe we could use a custom association with this label, that is
> weaker than the notion of subclass being built into the RIM.      (06)

I agree with above statement. Built-in support for ontologies are being 
planned for V4.    (07)

> For example,
> a formal notion of subclass would allow the child information object to
> automatically inherit the attributes of the parent.  Please correct me
> if I am misunderstanding the RIM or its implications.    (08)

Your assessment is correct.    (09)

> Additionally, I would recommend the Ontology classes be associated
> with a terminology registry for each concept (in essence equating a
> class with a concept).  Following step 3, in the protege Ontology 101
> document, we need to enumerate important terms in the Ontology.
> I am proposing a step beyond enumeration to formal definition with
> concept, terms and referents.  Is the ebXML registry suitable for a 
> terminology
> registry?     (010)

This is essentially the use of ebXML Registry that I was envisioning. 
The terminology from an Ontology be mapped to a ClassificationScheme in 
RIM following a specific binding that overcomes limitations of single 
inheritence etc. using custom association types such as (subClassOf). 
Such a ClassificationScheme mapped from an Ontology could be used to 
classify UBL (and any other content) managed within or outside the ebXML 
Registry. The automatic content cataloging feature of the registry could 
be used to classify specific content using the ontology mapped 
ClassificationSchemes. The ontology to RIM binding would also define 
custom ad hoc queries that could be used to do ontology based queries 
such as "Find all objects classified by an ontology class or its sub-class".    (011)

The main thing we would be lacking is a truly open-ended ontology 
inference engine. This could be addressed by an external ontology engine 
for now and in future be available as a feature of the ebXML Registry.    (012)

> Or do people know of others?
> - Mike
> -------------------------------
> Michael C. Daconta
> Chief Scientist, Advanced Programs Group
> McDonald Bradley, Inc.
> www.daconta.net    (013)

Farrukh    (014)

To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/    (015)
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>