Re: [ontolog-forum] [UBL] Post on controlled vocabularies for context q

[Tim McGrath <tmcgrath@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

john,

i am pleased to see that you have clarified the use of qualifiers to both object and property terms as a means
to denote the context.

 i would be interested in your feelings about the relationship between these
context qualifiers and context drivers.  would a controlled set of context
drivers be the vocabulary you are thinking of?

Yunker, John wrote:

On the last call I promised to make a post about use of controlled vocabularies in Core Components methodology.

The core components methodology specifies that the basic information structures 'Core Components' (CC) should be context free, and that these core components are transformed into context rich 'Business Information Entities' (BIE) through the adding of qualifiers to both object and property terms.  The methodology goes on to state that context is grouped into context categories, specifically Industry, Process, Geopolitical, Legislative, ProcessRole, SupportingRole, and System.

This construction method joins terms from at least three sets of controlled vocabularies (Object, Property, and ContextQualifier) and possibly extends to n vocabularies if you consider a controlled vocabulary for each large domain within each context category (for instance the ConsumerProducts industry and HealthCare industry would have two independent controlled vocabularies for context qualifiers, with the posibility of overlapping terms with different semantics).

My argument is that we can add significant value to the UBL and UN/CEFACT Core Components projects (as well as eBusiness alignment in general) by adding rigor to both the content and bounds of the controlled vocabularies used for context qualifiers.  If you would like, a set of ontologies that together facilitate an extensible common set of eBusiness building blocks.

Thanks,
John

-- 
regards
tim mcgrath
phone: +618 93352228  
postal: po box 1289   fremantle    western australia 6160