OASIS ebXML Core (ebCore) TC

Hi Bahareh, While I am missing much context, I would like to learn about the ebBP ontology and how it could be used if we were developing the ebBP standard from the beginning today. I am available this Friday if we decide to meet. Please send any suggested reading prior to the meeting so we can develop any context needed for understanding what you will be sharing. Thank you. On 02/22/2011 01:58 PM, Bahareh Heravi wrote: > Hello Everybody, > > I was wondering if you are interested to briefly discuss the ebBP ontology in this week's teleconference( or perhaps one of the upcoming ones), since the copyright issues regarding the ebBP ontology are resolved quite a while ago. > > For your information, since finishing the first version of the ebBP ontology I have been working on an ontology-based methodology for developing standards, where I will be using ebBP standard as an example / a case and would apply the method on that. The methodology is mainly for authoring the standards, however, it is possible to use it for formalising / re-engineering existing standards. At this point it is not possible for me to use the methodology for developing a new standard. However, we might propose a new TC in OASIS to further examine the possible benefits of ontology based standards development. > > Best regards > Bahareh > > >

Dear Farrukh, I am glad that you are interested in this work. Please find attached 4 files as follows: a)the ebBP Ontology, b) 2 papers on my older work which lead to the OntoStanD methodology, c) a short overview of OntoStanD Methodology, which gives you an insight into the methodology. Best regards Bahareh
Original Message----- From: Farrukh Najmi [ mailto:farrukh@wellfleetsoftware.com ] Sent: 22 February 2011 19:09 To: ebcore@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: Re: [ebcore] ebBP Ontology Hi Bahareh, While I am missing much context, I would like to learn about the ebBP ontology and how it could be used if we were developing the ebBP standard from the beginning today. I am available this Friday if we decide to meet. Please send any suggested reading prior to the meeting so we can develop any context needed for understanding what you will be sharing. Thank you. On 02/22/2011 01:58 PM, Bahareh Heravi wrote: > Hello Everybody, > > I was wondering if you are interested to briefly discuss the ebBP ontology in this week's teleconference( or perhaps one of the upcoming ones), since the copyright issues regarding the ebBP ontology are resolved quite a while ago. > > For your information, since finishing the first version of the ebBP ontology I have been working on an ontology-based methodology for developing standards, where I will be using ebBP standard as an example / a case and would apply the method on that. The methodology is mainly for authoring the standards, however, it is possible to use it for formalising / re-engineering existing standards. At this point it is not possible for me to use the methodology for developing a new standard. However, we might propose a new TC in OASIS to further examine the possible benefits of ontology based standards development. > > Best regards > Bahareh > > >

Long ago I promissed to provide feedback on your work, apologies for a late reply. I'm not an expert in OWL, but am interested in ebBP and have used it (but only in a very limited way) for some projects in the past. In the document "ebBP ontology", you list some competency questions. Most of these questions are fairly basic. They could also be answered by evaluation of Xpath expressions on ebBP XML documents. To show the added value of a reasoning model over process models, it would be interesting to see if it can help answer some more advanced questions. Example 1: ebBP elements define choreographed business transactions and support parallelism. The transitions are expressed by XML references. When there is a fork to some parallel sub-flows (possibly complex flows themselves), there needs to be a join somewhere where all paths through the embedded process graph meet again. Is it possible to express this constraint using OWL and DL query? The ebBP XSD isn't able to express this, beyond checking that referenced IDs exist in the ebBP instance. Example 2: one application for ebBP is run-time monitoring, and there is a separate TC in OASIS that is looking at monitoring e-business flows. Would the OWL representation of a process support monitoring? For example, based on a trace of timestamped received or sent messages, is it possible to write a DL Query to compute the expected next message and its timing? Pim
Original Message----- From: Bahareh Heravi [ mailto:Bahareh.Heravi@brunel.ac.uk ] Sent: 23 February 2011 15:47 To: 'Farrukh Najmi'; ebcore@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: RE: [ebcore] ebBP Ontology Dear Farrukh, I am glad that you are interested in this work. Please find attached 4 files as follows: a)the ebBP Ontology, b) 2 papers on my older work which lead to the OntoStanD methodology, c) a short overview of OntoStanD Methodology, which gives you an insight into the methodology. Best regards Bahareh
Original Message----- From: Farrukh Najmi [ mailto:farrukh@wellfleetsoftware.com ] Sent: 22 February 2011 19:09 To: ebcore@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: Re: [ebcore] ebBP Ontology Hi Bahareh, While I am missing much context, I would like to learn about the ebBP ontology and how it could be used if we were developing the ebBP standard from the beginning today. I am available this Friday if we decide to meet. Please send any suggested reading prior to the meeting so we can develop any context needed for understanding what you will be sharing. Thank you. On 02/22/2011 01:58 PM, Bahareh Heravi wrote: > Hello Everybody, > > I was wondering if you are interested to briefly discuss the ebBP ontology in this week's teleconference( or perhaps one of the upcoming ones), since the copyright issues regarding the ebBP ontology are resolved quite a while ago. > > For your information, since finishing the first version of the ebBP ontology I have been working on an ontology-based methodology for developing standards, where I will be using ebBP standard as an example / a case and would apply the method on that. The methodology is mainly for authoring the standards, however, it is possible to use it for formalising / re-engineering existing standards. At this point it is not possible for me to use the methodology for developing a new standard. However, we might propose a new TC in OASIS to further examine the possible benefits of ontology based standards development. > > Best regards > Bahareh > > >