I forwarded this thread to Duane Nickull, of XML Global because I consider
him to be an expert on ebXML Reg/Rep. Here is his response and I am
including him as a courtesy copy should anyone wish to reply/comment. (01)
Duane Nickull wrote: (02)
Yes please: (03)
The ebXML Registry could work as a Terminology servver since it is
largely agnostic to the Registry Objects themselves. What would have to
be studied is the classification trees, artifact structure (+ syntax)
and specialized associations needed to facilitate setting an ebXML
registry up as a terminology server. (04)
Some of this work has been started based on providing a semantic
equivalency function between elements of disparate taxonomies by
relating them to each other within certain contexts. This work involves
taking the UN/CEFACT Core Components methodologies and deriving an XML
syntax representation of both CC's and BIE's. Those artifacts are then
referenced via an ebXML and a uni or bilateral reference is made between
classes of equivalent objects. (05)
I support an open source project. It may be nice to tie in some of TB
Lee's work on semantic Web. (06)
Duane (07)
marion.royal@xxxxxxx wrote:
> Duane
> Would be happy to tie you into this thread if you would like to respond.
>
> --------------------------
> Marion A. Royal
> U.S. General Services Administration
> 202.208.4643 (Office)
> 202.302.4634 (Mobile)
>
> Sent from PDA - Please excuse fat thumbs.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: ontolog-forum-bounces
> Sent: 03/04/2003 12:06 PM
> To: ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Proposal for UBL Ontology Project
>
>
> In a message dated 3/3/2003 10:58:11 AM US Mountain Standard Time,
> farrukh.najmi@xxxxxxx writes:
>
>> A good way to do a virtual project is to do an open source project.
>
>
> Fully agree this is the way to go.
>
>> 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. 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. 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.
>
> 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? Or do people know of others?
>
> - Mike
> -------------------------------
> Michael C. Daconta
> Chief Scientist, Advanced Programs Group
> McDonald Bradley, Inc.
> www.daconta.net (08)
--
VP Strategic Relations,
Technologies Evangelist
XML Global Technologies
****************************
ebXML software downloads - http://www.xmlglobal.com/prod/ (09)
_________________________________________________________________
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/ (010)
|