[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Michael Champion wrote:
> I don't think we've beaten UBL to death the way we have the Semantic
> Web. Any thoughts on
> http://www.it-analysis.com/article.php?articleid=11971?
>
> "Well, OASIS looks as if it has solved [the alignment of syntax and
> semantics] problem with the publication of its Committee draft of the
> Universal Business Language (UBL) 1.0 last month. This is a major
> piece of work which is freely available and I believe should be the
> standard by which all new XML schemas and messages are built. ...
Well I've learned that anything that claims to be "Universal" almost
certainly isn't. With all due respect to this persons belief that
"(this) should be the standard by which all new XML Schemas and
messages are built ...", I'm not inclined to read further.
One big advantage of the current SW efforts, in sharp distinction to
prior efforts notably Cyc, is that no one is claiming that there is
some overarching directive:
One Schema to rule them all, One Schema to find them,
One Schema to bring them all and in the darkness bind them.
UBL? Resist the temptation...
Jonathan
|
