Hi Jim --
Agreed, W3C RDF-OWL are unlikely to solve CDSI without additional help [1,2].
However, RDF is a pivot data representation, and as such is 2N.
It has other drawbacks, but not the N**2 one.
Cheers, -- Adrian
[1] www.semantic-conference.com/program/sessions/S2.html
[2] www.w3.org/2004/12/rules-ws/paper/19
Adrian Walker
Reengineering
Phone: USA 860 830 2085
On 11/19/06, Schoening, James R C-E LCMC CIO/G6 <James.Schoening@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
John,
You
say: " So, it may be useful to focus on ways to extend the proven WWW
model, via W3C processes, to accommodate the CDSI requirements before
branching out to seriously consider other less tried and proven
approaches."
I
don't see that the W3C or Semantic Web community has a candidate
solution for CDSI. Tim Berners-Lee talks about "let a
thousand flowers bloom," but that's the old N**2 problem.
If they have a candidate solution, could someone please explain it to
us.
(I agree all
the candidate technical solution are unclear paths, and none may work,
but I believe large enterprises should try pursuing all viable
candidates.)
Jim Schoening
-----Original Message-----
From: cuo-wg-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cuo-wg-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
] On Behalf Of John Flynn
Sent: Saturday, November 18, 2006 9:46 AM
To: 'common upper ontology working group'; bcox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: 'Flynn, John P.'
Subject: Re: [cuo-wg] White Paper
Cory,
A
typical problem with government designed and managed architectures is
that they have the potential to represent a lowest common denominator
(LCD) approach in order to accommodate the interest of all the
candidate participants. The resultant LCD architectures are so vague
that they still allow many non-interoperable applications to be
developed and almost always contain relatively easy to obtain
provisions for exceptions. It seems that the one architectural standard
that has best held up over a number of years, gracefully evolved and
truly supported broad interoperability is the World Wide Web
architecture. It was not designed or managed by the government. Also,
it is not proprietary. So, it may be useful to focus on ways to extend
the proven WWW model, via W3C processes, to accommodate the CDSI
requirements before branching out to seriously consider other less
tried and proven approaches.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: cuo-wg-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:
cuo-wg-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Cory Casanave
Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2006 11:21 AM
To: bcox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; 'common upper ontology working group'
Subject: Re: [cuo-wg] White Paper
Brad,
We
have been thinking along similar lines but I submit the government has
to own their architectures, only they have the cross-cutting view (or
should have). Contractors can help build these, but the
architecture asset (as the _expression_ of the enterprise, enterprise
needs and solutions - business or
technical) has to be put into the acquisition cycle. Systems then need to
be
built to that architecture is an executable, testable
way. Those architectures have to STOP being "for a system"
and be "for the enterprise". SOA makes a great model for these
architectures - separating concerns and providing the boundaries to
build to. The semantic technologies can help here to join
and bridge architectures, but you are absolutely correct that the core
problem is not technical. -Cory
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://colab.cim3.net/forum/cuo-wg/
Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Config: http://colab.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/cuo-wg/
To Post: mailto:cuo-wg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Community Portal: http://colab.cim3.net/
Shared Files: http://colab.cim3.net/file/work/SICoP/cuo-wg/
Community Wiki:
http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?SICoP/CommonUpperOntologyWG
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives:
http://colab.cim3.net/forum/cuo-wg/
Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Config: http://colab.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/cuo-wg/
To Post: mailto:cuo-wg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Community Portal: http://colab.cim3.net/
Shared Files:
http://colab.cim3.net/file/work/SICoP/cuo-wg/
Community Wiki: http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?SICoP/CommonUpperOntologyWG
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://colab.cim3.net/forum/cuo-wg/
Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Config: http://colab.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/cuo-wg/
To Post: mailto:cuo-wg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Community Portal: http://colab.cim3.net/
Shared Files: http://colab.cim3.net/file/work/SICoP/cuo-wg/
Community Wiki:
http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?SICoP/CommonUpperOntologyWG (01)
|