[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [oor-forum] Motion to skip formal definition of OntologyRepository

To: "OpenOntologyRepository-discussion" <oor-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "Obrst, Leo J." <lobrst@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2008 10:30:11 -0500
Message-id: <9F771CF826DE9A42B548A08D90EDEA8002C9707D@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
I'd advise folks to look over xmdr.org (eXtended Metadata Registry)
before they re-invent 95% of the wheels, including definitions,
architecture, requirements, use cases, etc. Although XMDR, like the ISO
11179 Metadata Registry standard, is concerned with more than an
ontology registry/repository, their notions are extremely salient to
our effort. And no, I am not involved in XMDR, and am only interested
in seeing that good work is recognized, and possible duplication of
effort is avoided.    (01)

From: http://www.xmdr.org/overview.html, here is some statements of the
intent of XMDR (all quoted):    (02)

"Scope     (03)

This project is concerned with the development of improved standards
and technology for storing and retrieving the semantics of data
elements, terminologies, and concept structures in metadata registries.    (04)

Existing metadata registry standards include the ISO/IEC 11179 family
of Metadata Registry standards (e.g., ISO/IEC 11179, ISO/IEC 20943, and
ISO/IEC 20944). We intend to propose extensions of the ISO/IEC 11179
family of metadata registry standards to support more diverse types of
metadata and enhanced capabilities for semantics specification and
queries.     (05)

Propose revisions to ISO/IEC 11179 Metadata Registry (MDR) Standard. 
Creation of a prototype extended metadata registry. 
Loading some terminologies / ontologies into the prototype XMDR. 
Explore technologies for providing access to the XMDR across the
Internet.     (06)

We welcome participation in the project of additional parties who will
actively contribute (funds, data, code, labor). See Contact
Information.    (07)

Uses of Extended Metadata Registries     (08)

Extended metadata registries can be used for a variety of purposes
Data administration for databases - e.g., database design,
documentation, applications, user help, query planning and
optimization, federated databases/data integration, data warehousing
extraction/translation/loading, etc. 
Data administration for datasets - for (scientific) data not kept in
Data administration for messaging and data exchange - e.g., EDI,
e-commerce, military messaging, HL7, XML message exchange, ... 
Support for scientific workflow management systems, scientific and
statistical software "workbenches" 
Support the use and enforcement of controlled vocabularies, and
authority lists (for proper nouns such as places, organizations,
bibliographic citations, or persons). 
Support for interoperable annotation systems, e.g., annotation of
documents, programs, DNA sequences, genes, .... 
Support for natural language processing - entity extraction, etc. 
Agent support - provide a mechanism for software agents to discover,
retrieve, and update metadata. 
Support for semantic help facilities (e.g., data element definitions)
for data entry systems. 
Metadata support for case based reasoning (CBR) systems (used in
medicine, equipment failure analysis, software problem resolution,
architectural and mechanical design, and law enforcement applications) 
Bootstrap facility for Semantic Web applications. XMDR will provide a
mechanism for open sharing of ontologies and/or ontology metadata, thus
promoting sharing, interchange, merging and adoption of ontologies. 
Centralized storage for enterprise metadata that allows decentralized
stewardship of models (e.g. schemas, ontologies, etc.).     (09)

Proposed Revisions of ISO/IEC 11179 Medata Registry Standard(s)    (010)

Well-formed vs. Descriptive Metadata Content
The proposed revisions to ISO/IEC 11179 Metadata Registry Standard(s)
concerning enhanced capabilities with respect to terminologies,
classification schemes, and ontologies should be normative.     (011)

We would like (ultimately) to register semantically accurate,
ontologically well structured terminologies, classification schemes and
ontologies. This might well lead to a requirement to capture the
semantic specification in terms of a description logic.     (012)

We also expect to capture many existing terminologies, classification
schemes, etc. which may not meet the standards of a "well-formed"
terminology / classification scheme. Many existing terminologies /
classification schemes lack a description logic encoding or even
sufficient precise semantic specification to permit such a DL encoding
with much additional work (many person years per terminology).     (013)

Current thinking is that we may adopt a multi-level registration
process for terminologies / classification schemes akin to that used
for data element registration. Lower levels of registration would be
merely descriptive. Higher levels of registration would be required to
meet additional "well-formedness" requirements.     (014)

Coordination with related ISO JTC1 SC32 WG2 Standards Development    (015)

We are aware of efforts in ISO JTC1 SC32 WG2 led by Hajime Horiuchi
(Tokyo International Univ, ISO JTC1 SC32 WG2 Japan) to develop a
Metamodel Framework (MMF), which is intended to support registration of
ontologies, such as those specified in the OMG ODM approach. We expect
to coordinate our work with their efforts.     (016)

Prototype Extended Metadata Registry (XMDR)     (017)

The purpose of the prototype is to demonstrate the feasibility and
utility of constructing an extended metadata registry, i.e., one which
encompasses richer classification support, facilities for including
terminologies, and better support for formal specification of
semantics. The prototype registry will also serve as a reference
implementation for the revised versions of ISO 11179, Parts 2 and 3 to
help guide production implementations."     (018)

Use Cases: http://www.xmdr.org/use-cases.html. Please see this page for
a detailed description of the following.
High-level Use Cases
A. Support of Application Development and Maintenance - Single System
B. Support of Application Development and Maintenance - Multiple
C. Support of Data Migration or Exchange
D. Support a Portal or Data Warehouse - Single Organization
E. Support a Portal or Data Warehouse - Multiple Organizations
F. Support a Data Grid or an Online Transaction Network
G. Support for Development of a "Universal" Grid    (019)

Mid-level Use Cases
Location and Retrieval
Revision and Extension
Tracking and Versioning
Semantic Normalization
Semantic Disambiguation and Harmonization
Mapping and Interrelationships
Resource Discovery
Help Support    (020)

Prototype Architecture: http://www.xmdr.org/arch.html. Details at this
page.    (021)

Leo    (022)

Dr. Leo Obrst       The MITRE Corporation, Information Semantics 
lobrst@xxxxxxxxx    Information Discovery & Understanding, Command and
Control Center
Voice: 703-983-6770 7515 Colshire Drive, M/S H305 
Fax: 703-983-1379   McLean, VA 22102-7508, USA     (023)

-----Original Message-----
From: oor-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:oor-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Farrukh Najmi
Sent: Monday, February 04, 2008 4:44 PM
To: OpenOntologyRepository-discussion
Subject: Re: [oor-forum] Motion to skip formal definition of
OntologyRepository    (024)

Duane Nickull wrote:
> Yeah - this works too.  There are plenty of industry definitions.
> Farrukh - where is the ebXML definitions?  I really liked those.
>       (025)

I can't recall where those are.    (026)

Here are some that are close to my own definition:    (027)

Registry: "a central location in an organization where metadata 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metadata> definitions are stored and 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metadata_registry    (028)

Repository: "a place where data <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data> are    (029)

stored and maintained"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repository    (030)

Here is a good differentiation betwen the two:    (031)

http://ebxmlrr.sourceforge.net/wiki/Overview#The_Role_of_the_Registry    (032)

HTH.    (033)

> Duane
> On 2/4/08 10:47 AM, "Farrukh Najmi" <farrukh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> At the risk of repeating my past post on this, I feel this
>> and splitting of hairs on Registry / Repository terms to be quite
>> unnecessary and waste of bandwidth.
>> We should just create a terminology wiki page and simply link these
>> terms to existing definitions for these terms elsewhere and then
>> on defining use cases and requirements.
>       (034)

Farrukh Najmi    (035)

Web: http://www.wellfleetsoftware.com    (036)

Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/oor-forum/  
Subscribe: mailto:oor-forum-join@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
Config/Unsubscribe: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/oor-forum/    (037)

Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OOR/ 
Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OpenOntologyRepository     (038)

Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/oor-forum/  
Subscribe: mailto:oor-forum-join@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
Config/Unsubscribe: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/oor-forum/  
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OOR/ 
Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OpenOntologyRepository     (039)
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>