Leo Obrst wrote: (01)
>Unfortunately, an ontology will not only be a taxonomy or set of taxonomies.
>So the question I think still stands: can an ebXML Registry handle a graph
>structure, i.e., a network? On the one hand, an ontology can be considered a
>collection of assertions (axioms) and be represented as a list. But implicitly
>or explicitly, it is a graph with multiple inheritance as opposed to a
>taxonomy with single inheritance, which is a tree.
>
ebXML Registry today cannot be a full features ontology solution (We
have plans for supporting ontologies in the next version).
Since ebXMl Registry is extensible and allows any object to be related
any other object in an arbitrary association, we could define a binding
to model ontologies as graphs/networks. The ClassificationScheme type
supports a single inheritance model as a tree structure but with use of
Associations could model multiple inheritance. This is not a perfect
solution but a workable one until Ontolgy support is available. (02)
>
>One issue of course is that if you define a property for a class, will an
>ebXML registry enable inheritance of that property down the subclass graph?
>
Not inherently. However, because the registry supports ad hoc queries,
we could define custom ad hoc queries as part of the mapping thar are
funtionally polymorphic. (03)
>
>An ontology is both the vocabulary plus the meaning of that vocabulary in
>machine-interpretable form. Really therefore, it is a logical/conceptual model
>on steroids.
>
+1 (04)
>
>Now, if the ontology or ontologies are created in another tool (which can
>handle the above) and then entered into an ebXML registry, then what services
>can we expect from the registry?
>
A partial list includes: (05)
-Content specific automatic validation and cataloging whenever new
content is submitted (06)
-Ad hoc discovery capabilities (07)
-Distributed content management (08)
-Digital certificate based authentication (09)
-Fine grained access control using XACML (010)
What you cannot expect is ontology based inference capabilities out of
the box. The best we will manage until ontologies are supported will be
use of polymorphic ad hoc queries that will rely on the binding we
define to simulate ontology semantics. That is the theory, of course the
devil is in the details. (011)
>
>Thanks,
>Leo
>
>marion.royal@xxxxxxx wrote:
>
>
>
>>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.
>>
>>Duane Nickull wrote:
>>
>>Yes please:
>>
>>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.
>>
>>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.
>>
>>I support an open source project. It may be nice to tie in some of TB
>>Lee's work on semantic Web.
>>
>>Duane
>>
>>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
>>>
>>>
>>--
>>VP Strategic Relations,
>>Technologies Evangelist
>>XML Global Technologies
>>****************************
>>ebXML software downloads - http://www.xmlglobal.com/prod/
>>
>>_________________________________________________________________
>>To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
>>
>>
>
>--
>_____________________________________________
>Dr. Leo Obrst The MITRE Corporation
>mailto:lobrst@xxxxxxxxx Intelligent Information Management/Exploitation
>Voice: 703-883-6770 7515 Colshire Drive, M/S H305
>Fax: 703-883-1379 McLean, VA 22102-7508, USA
>
>
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
>
> (012)
--
Regards,
Farrukh (013)
_________________________________________________________________
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/ (014)
|