Re: taxonomy discussion at OASIS

[Len Gallagher <LGallagher@nist.gov>]

All,

We have a contribution on the taxonomy/classification issues. It's included
as an integral part of a registry/repository proposal.  We believe that it
satisfies all of Duane's requirements discussed in his email below:

   ftp://xsun.sdct.itl.nist.gov/regrep/GPregrepModel.pdf

The classification material is on pages 14-19, but the whole paper is about
30 pages in PDF file format.

Comments are welcome!

Sincerely,
Len Gallagher for both authors



At 10:14 AM 11/22/00 -0800, Duane Nickull wrote:
>Karl:
>
>This subject has been tackled by a few bold individuals.  The idea I put
>forth was to allow multiple classification schemes within a specified
>information model.  The RA can allow semantic references suggested by
>the SO or Data Steward to be referenced from the repository item.  An
>Example which may work is a fictional "Skateboard" company.   They may
>have a regrep item which contains all the information about their
>business including their products.  The document instance could appear
>similar to this:
>
><ItemsWeManufacture>
>  <item>
> 	<classification  Scheme="NAICS"
>value="SKT4-556">Skateboard</classification>
>	<classification  Scheme="UNSPSC"
>value="9111234-4444">Skateboard</classification>
>	<classification  Scheme="UPC-FRANCAIS" value="10764001051">Board du
>Skater</classification>
>  </item>
></ItemsWeManufacture>
>
>This model would allow for efficient retrieval of items by writing a
>parser handler that can iterate through the child elements of each
><item> element seeking for a attribute value equivalent to a recognized
>Scheme.  A contextual query can also seek for a match on an attribute
>value of a recognized scheme and return a hash of positive matches in a
>business case where a user was intending to locate manufacturer's of a
>specific item.  Becuase there can be multiple schemes employed for each
>product or item,  there are no inherent limitations (hence scalability,
>extensibility).
>
>This is also not limited to items for manufacture.  
>
>I believe that the OASIS, ebXML and UDDI registry models should contain
>information models which allow  multiple classification schemes.  Those
>who wish to re-invent the wheel are free to do so and those who use
>existing standards are also accomodated.
>
>My $0.02 CAD worth (now about $0.013 USD :(  )
>
>Duane Nickull
>
>Karl Best wrote:
>> 
>> I've been noticing lately a bit of discussion related to taxonomies in the
>> XML e-business space. In particular, most e-business efforts require some
>> sort of registry/repository to store information about companies with whom
>> an organization may do business with, and the registry needs some way to
>> classify the businesses for simple searching. For instance,
>> 
>> * The XML.org Registry stores schemas based on keywords, but needs a
>> taxonomy for better retrieval, as does the XML.org Portal which is seeking
>> to provide XML information sorted by vertical industry.
>> 
>> * The ebXML registry/repository will store information about businesses,
but
>> I'm not sure if a taxonomy has yet been defined.
>> 
>> * UDDI will register businesses for the purpose of discovery, and has
>> selected for taxonomies NAICS, UNSPSC, an unnamed geographic taxonomy,
and a
>> general purpose keyword classification (see
>> http://uddi.org/pubs/UDDI_XML_Structure_Reference.pdf page 25).
>> 
>> There's a real need to select a good taxonomy (or taxonomies) to classify
>> businesses and industries for the work that we're doing in creating
>> e-business registries. Notice that I say "select" and not "create" -- I
>> don't believe that XML experts should try to reinvent the wheel by creating
>> new taxonomies when there are better trained and more experienced people in
>> this field who do this stuff for a living. Robin Cover has done a bit of
>> research into the subject and has written a background on some of the many
>> taxonomies now available; see
>> http://www.oasis-open.org/cover/classification.html. Perhaps one or more of
>> these taxonomies would work for what we need.
>> 
>> I've set up an email list where we can discuss the use of taxonomies in the
>> XML e-business space. I'd like to discussed whether it's possible to select
>> an existing taxonomy that would meet the needs of ebXML, UDDI, XML.org,
>> etc., what the pros and cons of various taxonomies are, and what
criteria we
>> should use to select them. The ultimate goal of this list would be the
>> creation of an OASIS technical committee, which would select taxonomies for
>> use at OASIS and XML.org as well as make recommendations to other standards
>> goups.
>> 
>> This is an opt-in discussion list: to participate you must subscribe to the
>> discussion list by sending a message to
>> taxonomy-discuss-request@lists.oasis-open.org with the word "subscribe" as
>> the body of the message. After you are subscribed, you may send messages
for
>> the list to taxonomy-discuss@lists.oasis-open.org.
>> 
>> </karl>
>> ============================================================
>> Karl F. Best
>> OASIS - Director, Technical Operations
>> 978.667.5115 x206
>> karl.best@oasis-open.org  http://www.oasis-open.org
>
>