1. Referenced Documents

schoolmistInternet and Web Development

Oct 22, 2013 (4 years and 17 days ago)

142 views

SC32
\
WG2

N
1291

(CAC/SC32 C01
44
R
2
)


1

Title:

Canadian position on Procedure for Specification of Web Ontology

Supersedes:

-

Source:

Canada

Status:

National Body Position

Action:

For distribution to WG2

Date:

22 October 2013

1.

Referenced Documents

[1]

SC32/WG2 N1283 Presentation on Procedure for Specification of Web Ontology,
Jeong
-
Dong Kim, Doo
-
Kwon Baik, Dongwon Jeong, June 25, 2009

[2]

SC32 N1168 Editor’s Consolidated Version of ISO/IEC 11179
-
3:2003 and C
OR1

[3]

SC32 N1851 CD2 11179
-
3 Edition 3

[4]

ISO/IEC 19763:2007 Metamodel for Ontology Registration

[5]

SC32
N
1831 FCD 19763
-
3 Edition 2 Metamodel for Ontology Registration

2.

Introduction

Ref [1] is the latest output from the Study Period on Extending the MDR for the Se
mantic Web.
The stated intent of the proposal is to support the specification of

Web Ontology


using concepts
in the MDR (ref [2]).

However, the proposal makes no mention of the following projects:



Ref [3]


CD2 11179
-
3 Edition 3 which adds support for C
oncept Systems in the MDR



Ref [4]


ISO/IEC 19763
-
3:2007 Edition 1 which already supports Ontology Registration



Ref [5]


FCD 19763
-
3 Edition 2 which adds support for Ontology Evolution.

3.

Proposed Projects

The
WG2
meeting in
Jeju in
June 2009 approved a pro
ject split for ISO/IEC 20943 for a new part
6 as a Technical Report which would specify the procedure for Web Ontology specification.

However, the authors of ref [1] are proposing a new project with 3 parts:



Part 1 : Framework for Web Ontology Specificatio
n



Part 2 : Mapping Model between MDR and Web Ontology



Part 3 : Procedure for Web Ontology Specification

4.

Canadian
p
osition on proposed projects

Canada
believes there is value in the proposed work and Canada
supported the
creation of TR
20943
-
6 as resolved b
y WG2 in Jeju. However, Canada believes that the latest proposal to
replace that single TR by

a new project with three parts has not been justified

and the rationale
for creating multiple parts is unclear
.

Canada is concerned at the proliferation of proje
cts within WG2. WG2 has authorized a study
period to look at the harmonization and integration of 11179 and 19763, the first meeting of which
will be held in London in November 2009.

The positioning of this new work should be considered
as part this stud
y period.

SC32
\
WG2

N
1291

(CAC/SC32 C01
44
R
2
)


2

Canada requests that the proposed work on
Web Ontology Specification

first consider the
ongoing work on 11179
-
3 Edition 3 and 19763
-
3 Edition 2. If there is material that merits
standardization, WG2 should first look at positioning the material
in one of these existing projects.

If the material is still only intended to be a Technical Report, the TR can be organized into
clauses along the lines suggested for the three parts.

Canada notes that FCD 19773 was originally started as a multi
-
part stand
ard but was later
consolidated into a single document to make it more manageable.

Canada also notes that ISO/IEC 20943 is a freely available standard.

New parts of this standard
should also be freely available. If a new family of standards is started with

the proposed parts,
there is a risk that only the Framework (part 1) would be made freely available.

5.

Suggested title change

There are two problems with the proposed project title:

1.

The term ‘Web Ontology’ is not meaningful. What makes an Ontology a ‘Web’
Ontology?

2.

‘Ontology Specification’ on its own is too broad and needs to be qualified to reflect the
scope of the standard.

Since the proposal deals with specifying Ontologies based on MDR, we suggest this should be
r
eflected in the project title.

A simple
change to the existing titles, removing ‘Web’ and inserting ‘MDR
-
based’ gives:



Framework for
MDR
-
based
Ontology Specification



Procedure for
MDR
-
based
Ontology Specification

However, is it the Ontology or the Specification that is MDR
-
based? Perhaps the fo
llowing would
be better:



Framework for
MDR
-
based
Specification
of
Ontology



Procedure for
MDR
-
based
Specification
of
Ontology