On a similar note the OMG-SoaML standard (http://www.omg.org/spec/SoaML/)
provides a good framework for understanding services and architecting services
in a business context. While this is rendered as a UML profile there has been
some consideration for a complementary SoaML ontology to cover the same
territory.
Like Duane, I would suggest considering some of these existing resources rather
than creating a new stovepipe.
-Cory Casanave (01)
-----Original Message-----
From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Duane Nickull
Sent: Friday, October 07, 2011 1:35 PM
To: [ontolog-forum]
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] SOA organised with RDF - Use Case (02)
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? (03)
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. (04)
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. (05)
>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. (06)
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? (07)
>Using Michael Uschold's examples from the W3C thread here:
>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/semantic-web/2011Oct/0023.html
>[quote]
>If you need alternative interpretations then create them. If you don't
>know 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 kind of medical services (08)
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. (09)
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. (010)
I both miss and don't miss standards. (011)
Duane
> (012)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (013)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (014)
|