[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Next steps in using ontologies as standards

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "Anders W.Tell" <opensource@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 23:27:53 +0100
Message-id: <4977A169.2030302@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Rich,    (01)

A positive example could be the way PSL from NIST is being *re*used in 
some OMG standards. Both BusinessProcessDM and Executable is being 
integrated with PSL through the work of Conrad Bock and others.    (02)

Executable UML
A compact and computationally complete subset of UML 2 with a full 
specification of its semantics defined operationally and declaratively. 
The operational semantics is executable model with methods written in 
Java, with a mapping to UML Activity Diagrams. The declarative semantics 
is specified in first order logic and based on PSL.    (03)

The Business Process Definition Metamodel (BPDM) is the first standard 
metamodel to facilitate development of service-oriented architectures 
within and among enterprises by unifying internal business or department 
processes (orchestration) with interactions between businesses or 
departments (choreography). It is also the first standard metamodel to 
provide uniform performance, enactment, or execution of business 
processes by modeling common-sense notions of time and process, as 
captured in the Process Specification Language.    (04)

/anders w. tell
/Toolsmiths    (05)

Rich Cooper wrote:
> Dear All
> It appears that the ontology effort has too many cooks and too little brew.
> Everyone wants ontology movements to succeed, but the economics of applying
> ontological methods isn't compelling enough to get agreement.  
> The history of IEEE SUO, W3C, Cyc, and all but the Dublin Core ontology (so
> minimal in scope) projected into future work leaves me very pessimistic
> about ever seeing a widely subscribed ontology for all but the smallest
> domains (e.g., Dublin Core).  Maybe it just isn't feasible to standardize
> any large ontology.  
> Is our work producing benefits after all these years?  Positive examples
> would be useful to discuss before we self destruct on these issues.  
>       (06)

Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/  
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/  
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ 
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    (07)

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