Lists Home |
Date Index |
"Simon St.Laurent" wrote:
> email@example.com (Roger L. Costello) writes:
> >Thus, without a-priori agreement my application is able to process a
> >trading partner's document!
> Provided you picked the same ontological framework as the sender,
> sure. All this does is kick the a priori agreement up a level, usually
> to supposed experts.
The namespace of the elements indicates the Ontology. As I mentioned
earlier, an Ontology can evolve in a distributed fashion. There need
not be a centralized committee of experts. Besides, even if there was,
I would argue that creating a centralized committee to create a logical
design (i.e., an Ontology), and then allowing (encouraging!) diversity
of physical expressions ain't a bad way to go!
Naturally, you will most likely want to involve domain experts in
deciding what are the fundamental terms and their relationships.