I expect that providing Registry / Repository support for the semantic
content referenced as 'Technology Subjects - Symbol proxies' will be
discussed at length in the new regrep-semantic SC .
As co-chair I welcome any insights this group can share.
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/regrep-semantic/
<quote who="Bernard Vatant">
> We have indeed all reasons to extend the scope, and I've been in favor of
> that since the beginning. Deliverable 1 makes it pretty clear that the
> fundamental notions of "subject" and "topic", even if the terminology is
> borrowed from topic maps, have a very general range of application,
> encompassing all technologies "dealing with subjects through formal
> representations using symbols as proxies".
>
> Deliverable 1 is just mentioning some of those, like RDF. My guess is that
> Deliverable 2 could more explicitly deliver an indicative list of such
> major technologies, pointing at what type of proxies those technologies
> use, what type of subjects they represent by those proxies, like the kind
> of following table.
>
> Technology Symbol Proxies Types of subjects
>
> Topic Maps Topic Any
> RDF Resource - URI Any
> Thesaurus Descriptor Concept
> Taxonomy Class Taxons
> Ontology Class, Instance, Property Classes, Individuals and Relations
> Library Subject Heading Categories of documents
> Catalog Catalog Number Individuals (Products, Galaxies)
> Not a minor point either, in terms of outreach.
>
> Bernard
>
--
Carl Mattocks
co-Chair OASIS ebXMLRegistry Semantic Content SC
CEO CHECKMi
v/f (usa) 908 322 8715
www.CHECKMi.com
Semantically Smart Compendiums
(AOL) IM CarlCHECKMi
