RE: SUO: XMP
Dear Frederick,
I can buy this. It is similar to what we do in ISO TC184/SC4.
For example, in ISO 10303 - STEP we have some Integrated Resources which we
configure to develop Application Protocols that specify how exchanges can be
defined for a particular purpose.
We didn't get everything right, but the basic idea was good.
Regards
Matthew
============================================
Matthew West
Operations & Asset Management
Shell Services International
H3229, Shell Centre, London, SE1 7NA, UK.
Tel: +44 207 934 4490 Fax: 7929
Mobile: +44 7796 336538
E-mail: Matthew.R.West@is.shell.com
http://www.shellservices.com/
============================================
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Frederick N. Chase [mailto:fnc@mitre.org]
> Sent: 13 February 2001 17:08
> To: 'standard-upper-ontology@majordomo.ieee.org'
> Subject: Re: SUO: XMP
>
>
>
>
> >
> > It is necessary that the IEEE SUO be
> > an *example* of an upper level which can be adapted,
> extended, or partly disabled.
> >
> > The current Merged Ontology is not an example.
>
>
> Two instances of such an exammple-standard (meta-standard?) follow.
>
>
> First instance:
>
> The Common Criteria (ISO IS 15408)
> (which has replaced the "Orange Book") for
> security evaluation of computers.
> http://csrc.nist.gov/cc/index.html
>
> The Common Criteria is a huge set of components.
> These components are "on the shelf" awaiting assemblage
> into a Protection Profile.
> So the Common Criteria is a standard but also in a sense
> an example.
> The Common Criteria is not useful as a standard directly --
> it is a constructor for useful standards (protection profiles).
>
> There are (an increasing number of)
> vetted, accepted protection profiles.
> There is a pretty elaborate process for determining
> suitable/legitimate combinations of components from the "shelf"
> (the Common Criteria).
>
> The analogy would be:
>
> IEEE SUO upper level <-> All "Components" in the "Criteria"
>
> Adapted SUO instance/
> example/
> reference object <-> a Protection Profile
>
>
>
> Second instance:
>
> Standard Upper Ontology Knowledge Interchange Format
> (http://suo.ieee.org/suo-kif.html)
>
> A "conformance profile" is a selection of alternatives from
> each conformance dimension (such as Term Complexity and
> Quantification).
> It is an Interchange Format.
>
> So this Knowledge Interchange Format is (would be)
> a standard but also, in a sense, an example or meta-standard.
>
> There would be (an increasing but limited number of)
> widely-used "conformance profile"s.
> There is a process for determining
> suitable/legitimate combinations of language (Interchange
> Format) elements
> (involving "conformance dimensions").
>
> The analogy would be:
>
> IEEE SUO upper level <-> Standard Upper Ontology
> Knowledge Interchange Format
> (http://suo.ieee.org/suo-kif.html)
>
> Adapted SUO instance/
> example/
> reference object <-> a "conformance profile"
>