Re: Questions on Delivery Context Ontology

Hi Deborra,

Thanks for the email and sorry for the delay in a response. The 
editor of the Delivery Context Ontology is on a 3 week vacation, and 
it may therefore take us a while to respond fully.

Best regards,

  Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org> http://www.w3.org/People/Raggett

On Thu, 21 Aug 2008, Deborra J Zukowski wrote:

> Greetings,
>
> We are in the process of adapting xml documents based on the 
> characteristics of web-connected mailing systems. As part of this 
> process, we want to conform to the principles that your group is 
> doing in the delivery context ontology effort. Though OWL is not 
> currently in our technology stack (nor RDFS), we are trying to 
> model the concepts in XML Schema in a way to move to the OWL 
> version when the ideas modeled in the ontology stabilize and the 
> OWL tools and engines mature and are accepted in our organization. 
>
> To this end, I've tried to develop a schema that captures the 
> concepts and details provided in the Ontology, as defined by the 
> April 15, 2008 working draft. There are a few high-level questions 
> I have. First, I see that the starting point appears to the CCPP 
> version 2.0 (the RFDS version). From what I can tell, the CCPP 
> effort really focused on location-based computing, as enabled 
> primarily by cell phones. The CCPP seems to have artifacts 
> specific to this focus, e.g., explicitly calling out camera 
> elements as opposed to representing it as an example input device. 
> Also, the notion of applications that can run on the device appear 
> very centric to document delivery (e.g., browser-based). Further, 
> from what I can determine, the scope of the Delivery Context 
> Ontology is really targeted at a wider class of web-based devices 
> and applications, and so such artifacts, though currently present, 
> will likely be generalized for true ubiquitous computing systems. 
>
> Assuming that my understandings of both existing work and current 
> direction are on base, I believe that I have a representation of 
> the concepts significantly implemented in an XML Schema. Note that 
> there were some aspects of the ontology that I hedged, since I did 
> not understand certain parts of it. These will hopefully be 
> represented better as my team's project (and our understanding) 
> progresses. So, I'd like to offer up the XML schema as a way of 
> representing some of the more specific questions I have, and as a 
> potential way to perhaps help convey issues specific to 
> web-connected mailing systems. For convenience, I've attached an 
> initial draft of the schema documents that we've created. Does it 
> make sense for my group to get involved in this effort, and if so, 
> how?
>
> Thanks much,
> Deborra Zukowski, Pitney Bowes
>
> PS. I've put in some document elements in the schema to highlight 
> places where I made changes from the structure of the ontology. I
>

Received on Saturday, 23 August 2008 18:41:47 UTC