That's right. On the SWIFT side, there is a new ISO standard
(deployable on SWIFT and on other networks) called ISO 20022
which uses XML. Individual, context-specific XML message schemas
are generated from a common repository of terms. The repository
was intended to define terms at a semantic level but it's more
like a logical data model, however the terms are well defined and
understood. A future version would be likely to implement an
explicitly semantic layer on top of that using some agreed
semantics (i.e. Common Logic based) format, e.g. OWL or OWL on ODM. (01)
Other standards in the financial industry space are also starting
to migrate up the stack from physical (XML / EDI / EDIFACT, ASN.1
etc.) to logical and will no doubt end up embracing formal
semantics notations. (02)
In the meantime, as you say, the meanings of the terms are
(generally) implicit in the context of the message. And the
software that decodes those messages has to have been aware of
the meanings when it was developed. After all, any program has an
ontology whether it's formally stated in logical notation or if
it's just in the programmer's head and a couple of spreadsheets.
The advantage of formal ontologies is not that meaning wasn't
dealt with before, but that it was dealt with on a channel by
channel basis and so was not portable. XML lets us consume the
same information in multiple programs, and a formal,
referenceable ontology lets that consumption go on without nasty
misunderstandings. (03)
Message based context is not the source of meaning for every kind
of term though. For instance if you compare "The price at which
IBM shares traded on NYSE at Close of Business 10 Sept" with "The
price at which I agree to purchase 10,000 IBM shares from you",
one has a meaning which is the same no matter what message it's
placed in, and the other has a meaning which is an intimate part
of the specific business transaction that's embodied by the
message that it's in, i..e the message sets the context which
determines the meaning. Capture the context (in an ontology which
has semantic model representation of processes) and you will have
captured the meaning. Then the same information can be consumed
my additional applications, for example risk management,
compliance and reporting, rather than someone having to write new
software interfaces each time. (04)
Mike (05)
On 10/09/2010 12:29, doug foxvog wrote:
> Other examples of widely used messaging schemas are the EDI (Electronic
> Data Interchange) systems which have been used for business messaging
> since the 1970s. Most of the world uses UN/EDIFACT, while US businesses
> generally use ANSI's X12. Certain industries have their own messaging
> systems, such as SWIFT for international banking. These systems have
> hundreds of message formats with thousands of distinct codes whose
> meanings are context-dependent (which subpart of which type of message).
> Software automatically generates and interprets these messages from/for
> the businesses' databases.
>
> Hundreds of thousands (millions?) of such messages are transmitted
> between companies each business day. So the idea that tools can not
> be generated to enable Semantic Web data to be encoded in a set of
> standard ontologies, does not seem that far out to me.
>
> The Digital Enterprise Research Institute (DERI), a leading Semantic
> Web developer, mapped hundreds of message types from the two largest
> EDI systems into ontological terms, assembling the terms into ontologies.
>
> A number of these systems are now being converted by the standards
> bodies to XML and RDF encodings.
>
> -- doug foxvog
>
> On Thu, September 9, 2010 12:34, Godfrey Rust said:
>> William
>>
>> Your point is one that has exercised me since the 1990s: but I dont
>> believe the dividing line is so drastic. An increasing amount of data is
>> managed through common message schemas, which - provided they are
>> carefully developed - provide a good standard of controlled vocabulary. In
>> the media domains in which I work - music, books, journals, libraries,
>> audiovisual with standards - there is a very strong move in this direction
>> and a range of established and emerging standards such as ONIX, DDEX and
>> RDA, and other domains are further developed than we are. Data of this
>> kind is starting to find its way into "linked open data" (using that term
>> in a general sense, not specifically in the Semantic Web RDF sense) and I
>> expect namespaces other than the basic dc: and foaf: to become commonplace
>> and widely used over the next decade. Ontology has a key role in the
>> mapping and interoperating of these schemas, and then in reasoning over
>> the resulting data.
>>
>> Of course, we are always at the mercy of those who create the messages to
>> use the schemas correctly, and there will always be a non-trivial margin
>> of error: but on the whole I think good message standards are the key as
>> they deliver reasonable quality data which can be subjected to varying
>> degrees of ontological processing. At Rightscom we developed the DDEX
>> message standards using an underlying ontology, which for five years
>> hardly anyone in the domain has even been aware of. Now there is interest
>> in making this ontology explicit and using it as a basis for linked data.
>>
>> So to my mind ontolog is very much concerned with the use of ontology on
>> data that's "out there in web-land" - the key issue is knowing (a) the
>> namespaces (and thereby the schemas) of the terms you are processing and
>> (b) the provenance of the data. The former seems to be gradually getting
>> somewhere; the latter is more challenging.
>>
>> Godfrey
>>
>> Godfrey Rust
>> Chief Data Architect
>> Rightscom/Ontologyx
>> Linton House LG01
>> 164/180 Union Street, London SE1 0LH
>> www.rightscom.com
>> Direct +20 8579 8655
>> Rightscom Office +20 7620 4433
>> Mobile 07967 963674
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Burkett, William [USA]"<burkett_william@xxxxxxx>
>> To: "[ontolog-forum] "<ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Sent: Thursday, September 09, 2010 5:03 PM
>> Subject: [ontolog-forum] (renamed) Terms with fixed/multiple meanings
>>
>>
>>> John: I understand your point that a "term" in a formal language (e.g.,
>>> ontology) should have a single, unique definition - this allows
>>> automated processors to (soundly) do something with statements in the
>>> language.
>>>
>>> It is important to point out, however, that this requirement addresses a
>>> very small set of users "out there in web-land" - less than 1% I would
>>> guess. The "semantic web" will never materialize with this requirement
>>> because, simply, a very very large percentage of data-creators don't
>>> have the understanding and won't devote the time/rigor required to
>>> create these semantically precise statements. Most will create their
>>> schemas and ontologies and create their data using their natural
>>> language skills/capabilities/facilities - leading to multiple and
>>> evolving meanings. So, realistically, except for a very small
>>> population, "terms" that are used to name things in web-land *will* have
>>> multiple meanings. We can exclude those undisciplined cases and
>>> operate in our own small, rigorous, well-defined world - but how useful
>>> will that really be? (Like everything in AI, it seems, it'll be useful
>>> in special cases, but not in general.)
>>>
>>> As I write this, it brings the question of scope to my mind: in our
>>> discussions here are we ONLY interested in talking about formal
>>> ontologies with precisely-defined semantics that can soundly reasoned
>>> over, or are we talking about the "semantic web" (or "semantic
>>> enterprises") in general where, presumably, we can evolve to a point
>>> where processors can do something will all the data "out there in
>>> web-land"?
>>>
>>>
>>> Bill
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> [mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of John F.
>>> Sowa
>>> Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 4:04 PM
>>> To: ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Semantic Enterprise Architecture -
>>> Interoperability?
>>>
>>> David and Doug,
>>>
>>> DF>> a Semantic Web needs ontologies of terms with fixed meanings
>>>
>>> DE> Is this saying that a term (word, phrase, acronym, abbreviation,
>>>> whatever) can only have a single meaning?
>>> We must always distinguish the names of relations and instances
>>> in any formal language from the words in any natural language
>>> that is being mapped to that formal language.
>>>
>>> DF used the word 'term' for the symbols in some formal language.
>>> Those symbols should have unique definitions.
>>>
>>> DE was talking about the words used in some NL that is being
>>> mapped to the symbols of some formal language.
>>>
>>> The names used in the formalism should never be identified
>>> with the words in the NL -- even when their spelling happens
>>> to be similar.
>>>
>>> John
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>> ______________________________________________________________________
>>> This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
>>> For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
>>> ______________________________________________________________________
>>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>
> =============================================================
> doug foxvog doug@xxxxxxxxxx http://ProgressiveAustin.org
>
> "I speak as an American to the leaders of my own nation. The great
> initiative in this war is ours. The initiative to stop it must be ours."
> - Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
> =============================================================
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
> (06)
--
Mike Bennett
Director
Hypercube Ltd.
89 Worship Street
London EC2A 2BF
Tel: +44 (0) 20 7917 9522
Mob: +44 (0) 7721 420 730
www.hypercube.co.uk
Registered in England and Wales No. 2461068 (07)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (08)
|