Bridging 20943-6: FGO and 11179-3 ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 32/WG2 Interim Meeting Krakow, Poland, October...

Bridging 20943-6: FGO and 11179-3

ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 32/WG2 Interim Meeting

Krakow, Poland, October 16, 2012

Dongwon Jeong, Kunsan National University [email protected]

Doo-Kwon Baik, Korea [email protected]

ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 32/WG 2 N1708

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]


Contents

Introduction to ISO/IEC 20943-6: FGO Purpose and Scope Framework Mapping Models Discussion History and Current Stage

What is the Next? Background and Motivation How to Resolve the Problems Potential Standard Issues

Q/A

2

Purpose and Scope

This part of ISO/IEC 20943 provides a standardized method to generate ontologies using resources

in MDRs specifies procedures for generating ontologies and a mapping model

between components of MDR and Ontology facilitates usability of ISO/IEC 11179

The purposes of this part are to promote the followings: Generating ontologies consisting of common concepts Easy and clear understanding of concepts across corresponding the

same or similar application fields More formalized building of ontology Ease of definition (building) of ontology Enhancement of interoperability between ontologies

This part does not contain ontology building methods by a specific ontology description language,

such as RDF, RDF-S, OWL, Topic Maps, KIF, and so on

3Bridging 20943-6: FGO and 11179-3


Framework

A framework for generating ontologies

Registries built according to ISO/IEC 11179-3 manage various types of metadata including concepts

ISO/IEC 20943-6 refers to common concepts in the registries for generating ontologies

The common concepts are reused to generate ontologies through the mapping model and the procedure described in this part of ISO/IEC 20943

4

OntologiesISO/IEC 20943-6

1

2

3

Metadata registries

de_name . . . reg_status

Korea01 . . . Submitted

Korea02 . . . Recorded

Korea02. . . . Korea02




Korea02. . . . . Korea02. . .




Korea02 . . . Korea02
















Korea02. . . . . Korea02. . .




















Korea02. . . . . Korea02. . .













Procedure

Mapping model

4

Discussion History and Current Stage

The idea of this proposal has been presented in the following meetings

SC32 Joint Study Period, Clearwater, Florida, USA, January 2007

SC 32 Plenary and WG Meetings, New York, USA, May 2007

SC 32/WG 2 Interim, Seoul, Korea, December 2007

SC 32 Plenary and WG Meetings, Australia, May 2008

SC 32/WG 2: Workshop on ROR-ODMS-SMMP Study Periods, Wuhan, China, November 2008

SC 32/WG 2 Interim, Portugal, November 2008

SC 32 Plenary and WG Meetings, Jeju, Korea, June 2009

– NP was approved.

SC 32/WG 2: Wuhan Study Period Meeting on ROR, ODMS, PSO, SQL/MM-8 MDR, Wuhan, China, August 2009

SC 32/WG 2 Interim, London, UK, November 20095Bridging 20943-6: FGO and 11179-3

Discussion History and Current Stage (cont.)

SC 32 Plenary and WG Meetings, Kunming, China, May 2010

SC 32/WG 2: Wuhan Study Period Meeting on Ontology-Metamodeling and Semantic Interoperability in Cloud Era, Wuhan, China, August 2010

SC 32/WG 2 Interim meeting, Redwood City, USA, November 2010

SC 32 Plenary and WG Meetings, Kona, USA, May 2011

– PDTR for ballot was submitted for 3 month voting in July 2011 (32N2148T)

– PDTR was supported with 7 approval, 3 disapproval and 4 abstention (32N2178)

SC 32/WG 2 Interim meeting, Crete, Greece, October 2011

SC 32 Plenary and WG Meetings. Berlin, Germany, June, 2012

– All comments are closed in the Berlin meeting (WG2_N1659)

Currently, DTR text for ballot is submitted to JTC 1.

– Text for DTR Ballot (32N2264T)

6Bridging 20943-6: FGO and 11179-3


What is the Next?: Background & Motivation

What Problems with the WG 2 Standards Metamodels, i.e., most standards in WG 2 are Conceptualized and

Abstracted.– No Implementation Models

Little Standardized Interfaces (Bridges) between Standards

Therefore, It is hard to understand and use the standards Various implementations are/will be developed, and thus it makes another

Heterogeneity (Inconsistency) Issue It requires much cost to develop implementations of one or more standards

7


What is the Next?: How to Resolve the Problems

Implementation models and interfaces should be provided

8

ISO/IEC 11179-3 ISO/IEC 20943-6

ISO/IEC 11179-3 ISO/IEC 20943-6Interfacing (Bridging)

Method

Bridge (Interface)Metamodels

ImplementationModels

implementation implementationstandardization


Potential Standard Issues and Discussion

Potentials Implementation Models

– Relational/OR/OO/XXX Model-based Implementation Models for ISO/IEC 11179-3 and ISO/IEC 20943-6: FGO

Interfacing Methods– 20944-like Approach for interfacing between 20943-6 and 11179-3– XXX-based/-oriented Approaches

Discussion

9

Dongwon [email protected]; http://djeong.kunsan.ac.kr/Kunsan National University

Doo-Kwon [email protected] University

Thank you for attention!

Bridging 20943-6: FGO and 11179-3 ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 32/WG2 Interim Meeting Krakow, Poland, October...

Documents

Transcript of Bridging 20943-6: FGO and 11179-3 ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 32/WG2 Interim Meeting Krakow, Poland, October...