[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] SOA organised with RDF - Use Case

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Duane Nickull <dnickull@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 10:35:27 -0700
Message-id: <CAB4832A.34FC9%dnickull@xxxxxxxxx>
Sorry to interject, but to me the term "SOA Ontology" means an ontology or
set of formal abstract constraints that declare the knowledge of "what"
SOA is (profuse apologies if this is errant).  If the ontology work is to
classify things that are not exclusive to SOA, then it should not be
called an "SOA ontology" perhaps. Is there a definition of exactly what is
meant by SOA ontology?    (01)

Here are some additional comments:
>1) It was simply easier to build a custom SOA ontology than use a
>standard one and customize it to fit the existing process.    (02)

DN: Without knowing exactly what the presumed metric for "easier" is and
that the definition of "standard ontology", the logic should dictate that
if the SOA ontology is a subset of a the "standard one", it should be less
work as it is more specialized, smaller and constrained.  If the metric is
the number of hours it takes vs the size of the resulting ontology it
should be logically smaller.    (03)

>I think that if someone was starting from scratch, it would be
>beneficial to use an existing SOA ontology, at least as a starting
>point. The ability to develop it over time and adopt it to evolving
>needs would be a key requirement. One thing that would be lost is the
>consistency with the original, unless there was a specific need to
>keep it consistent.    (04)

DN: I would strongly encourage use of the OASIS SOA Reference Model for
SOA.  Even if the ontologist disagrees with the work, it is a good place
to use as a common point of reference.  We knew this when the work was
done and it still seems people are having issues thinking about it as an
abstract point of reference.  The new work from the OASIS Technical
Committee is also highly relevant to developing a taxonomy of class or
sets of things within a service oriented environment.  It might be a good
starting point to use?    (05)

>Using Michael Uschold's examples from the W3C thread here:
>If you need alternative interpretations then create them.  If you don't
>whether a hospital is:
>1. the building that health care is provided in
>2. the legal organization that owns the building
>3. the legal entity that has a number of beds registered for a specific
>of medical services    (06)

DN: I have worked with Michael and love his work but nothing you say here
is specific to an "SOA Ontology" per se.  Whether or not they use service
oriented architecture, are these statements still valid?  I would think
that the correlation should be easy to make to the OASIS SOA Reference
Architecture.    (07)

Health care = service offered
Building = demarcation of the service functionality boundaries
Legal organization = service provider or proxy thereof
Beds = part of the service offered in combination with other "things"
Medical service (above) is the interesting animal here.  This is really
part of the service but if done correctly, represents the real world
effect of consuming the service.    (08)

I both miss and don't miss standards.    (09)

>    (010)

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    (011)

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