[Top] [All Lists]

[ontolog-forum] Re: [regrep-cc-review] What if? CCRIM => CCOWL

To: ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: Peter Yim <peter.yim@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2004 11:09:52 -0800
Message-id: <3FF47080.5000304@xxxxxxxx>
Farrukh Najmi wrote Thu, 01 Jan 2004 12:27:39 -0500:    (01)

> James Bryce Clark wrote Wed, 31 Dec 2003 18:41:33 -0800:
>>     1.  Has OWL become the consensus methodology?  
> That is my sense that OWL is the consensus for Ontology definition.    (02)

>> Has DAML+OIL satisfactorily converged with it?  
> Yes. AFAIK, OWL supersedes DAML+OWL.    (03)

>> Are topic maps out of the running?  
> Some say you need both Topic Maps and OWL, though I cannot understand 
> why. In my mind OWL supersedes Topic Maps..    (04)

>> RDF?  
> OWL is RDF. It is a dialect of RDF.    (05)

>> I had the impression at XML2003 that there are still multiple 
>> plausible parallel paths here.  
> There are always multiple paths to every destination even if some are 
> filled with cob-webs and hurdles. OWL seems to me to be the path that 
> will survive.    (06)

>> Obviously one high-level design issue for ebXML is potential 
>> catholicity among tools and specifications.  Putting it differently, 
>> is "choosing" OWL a significant compatibility or vendor-alignment issue?
> I propose an incremental strategy for adding OWL support as an optional 
> feature initially. This will allow vendors and users to keep pace with 
> the evolving standard.    (07)

>>     If you go down this path, I've also had chats with other semantic 
>> methods experts that might be worth pinging.
> Please send me your thoughts on who we should ping. I see the need for 
> coordination with the proposed RDF Data Access WG most urgently as I see 
> significant overlap between their proposed charter and that of the 
> proposed Semantic Content Management SC of ebXML Registry.    (08)

>>     2.  Have you followed the possible cognate work in [ontolog-forum] 
>> (where I think at least Farrukh is a subscriber) or OAGI's Semantic 
>> Integration Working Group?
> I have not been following either too closely but plan to get more 
> involved with ontolog forum starting now.    (09)

>>     Warm regards and happy new year   Jamie
> Happy new year to you and all my dear colleagues.
> -- 
> Regards,
> Farrukh    (010)

Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ 
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    (011)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>