[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Cox, Bruce <Bruce.Cox@USPTO.GOV> writes:
> In this context, I think CAM is not appropriate. Published
> patent documents are not dynamic, there are no transactions
> between just discovered business partners, so there is no
> ambiguity of context. The content validation mechanism of
> CAM appears to be mostly a framework for local customization,
> which I think would not justify the overhead of CAM for this purpose.
>
Even without dynamic partner discovery I'm interested in your statement
that there is no ambiguity of context. Business rule application seems
to be one of those areas where multiple conflicting contexts pop up all
the time.
Perhaps the patent world is well enough understood that you feel it's
not an issue? Or perhaps, you don't see a way in CAM to help you
navigate the particular types of ambiguity you are up against? That
seems more likely given your last statement; I'm guessing that the
particular problem domain you're working on doesn't have multiple
organizations trying to view the same content in different ways?
|
