June 2001

• [June 29, 2001] "XML for Data: Using XML Schema Archetypes. Adding Archetypal Forms to Your XML Schemas." By Kevin Williams (Chief XML architect, Equient - a division of Veridian). From IBM developerWorks. June 2001. ['In the first installment of his new column, Kevin Williams describes the benefits of using archetypes in XML Schema designs for data and provides some concrete examples. He discusses both simple and complex types, and some advantages of using each. Code samples in XML Schema are provided.'] "In my turn on the Soapbox, I mentioned in passing how archetypes can be used in XML Schema designs for data to significantly minimize the coding and maintenance effort required for a project, and to reduce the likelihood of cut-and-paste errors. In this column, I'm going to give you some examples of the use of archetypes in XML schemas for data, and show just where the benefits lie. What are archetypes? Archetypes are common definitions that can be shared across different elements in your XML schemas. In earlier versions of the XML Schema specification, archetypes had their own declarations; in the released version, however, 'archetypes' are implemented using the simpleType and complexType elements. Let's take a look at some examples of each. Simple archetypes are created by extending the built-in datatypes provided by XML Schema. The allowable values for the type may be constrained by so-called facets, a fancy term for the different parameters that may be set for each built-in datatype. It's also possible to create a simple type by defining a union of two other datatypes or by creating a list of values that correspond to some other datatype. For our purposes, however, the restrictive declaration of simple types is the most interesting. Let's take a look at some examples... This installment has taken a look at the use of archetypes in the design of XML schemas. You've seen that judicious use of archetypes, together with smart naming conventions, can make schemas shorter and easier to maintain. There's an additional benefit to using archetypes -- a little trick to ensure consistent styling of your information..." Note the reference to the author's book Professional XML Schemas [ISBN: 1861005474], from Wrox Press; released now/soon. For schema description and references, see "XML Schemas."

• [June 26, 2001] "DAML Processing in Jess (DAMLJessKB)." From Joe Kopena. 2001-06-26. "This software is intended to facilitate reading DAML files, interpreting the information as per the DAML language, and allowing the user to query on that information. In this software we leverage the existing RDF API (SiRPAC) to read in the DAML file as a collection of RDF triples. We use Jess (Java Expert System Shell) as a forward chaining production system which carries out the rules of the DAML language. The core Jess language is compatible with CLIPS and this work might be portable to that system. A similar approach is taken by DAML API, they also hook RDF API into Jess. However the bridge they use between the two is a little different and at the moment less complete in at least the publicly available version. The basic flow of this library is as follows: (1) Read in Jess rules and facts representing the DAML language; (2) Have RDF API read in the DAML file and create SVO triples; (3) Take triples and assert into Jess' rete network in VSO form, with some slight escaping of literals and translation; (4) Have Jess apply the rules of the language to the data; (5) Apply the agent's rules, queries, etc. The bridge between RDF API and Jess is very simple: each triple is inserted more or less as-is into the knowledge base. A not insignificant help in this is Jess' relatively loose syntax constraints, very few characters need to be escaped to be valid. In Jess these are referred to as ordered slots. An alternative would be to build Jess' unordered (named) slots. This would require more preprocessing of the triples to determine relations. It might be more efficient but also might break down due to the cumulative nature of DAML/RDF -- facts about an object can be asserted at any time and don't neccesarily follow the template. In DAML/RDF it is ok to assert an arbitrary relation about an object at any time unless specifically stated otherwise. This might not mesh well with Jess' templating mechanism. We generally follow the methodology of the DAML/RDF/RDF-S KIF Axiomatization in building our rules. Each fact is asserted as the sentence (PropertyValue <predicate> <subject> <object>). This is sufficient to assert any RDF/DAML information, since all constructs boil down to an underlying set of triples..." Note from Joe Kopena on 'www-rdf-interest@w3.org', 2001-06-26: "At the moment I'm working on a project using DAML to exchange information between units (arguably agents). I'm using it to encode my data and for the ontologies which express what the data means. Recently I've been doing some work on taking in DAML through RDF API and feeding it into Jess (Java Expert System Shell) to be processed. The result is that the data gets treated as DAML as opposed to just RDF triples. . . I'm using DAML in very simple ways at the moment (not even comparable in a number of ways to RDF Schema), but the number of constructs processed is growing as I need them and the system seems fairly useful already. Comments, suggestions, questions, discussion are all welcome..." See "DARPA Agent Mark Up Language (DAML)."

• [June 26, 2001] "An Axiomatic Semantics for RDF, RDF-S, and DAML+OIL." By Richard Fikesand Deborah L. McGuinness. (Knowledge Systems Laboratory, Computer Science Department, Stanford University). March 1, 2001. "This document provides an axiomatization for the Resource Description Framework (RDF), RDF Schema (RDF-S), and DAML+OIL by specifying a mapping of a set of descriptions in any one of these languages into a logical theory expressed in first-order predicate calculus. The basic claim of this paper is that the logical theory produced by the mapping specified herein of a set of such descriptions is logically equivalent to the intended meaning of that set of descriptions. Providing a means of translating RDF, RDF-S, and DAML+OIL descriptions into a first-order predicate calculus logical theory not only specifies the intended meaning of the descriptions, but also produces a representation of the descriptions from which inferences can automatically be made using traditional automatic theorem provers and problem solvers. For example, the DAML+OIL axioms enable a reasoner to infer from the two statements 'Class Male and class Female are disjointWith.' and 'John is type Male.' that the statement 'John is type Female.' is false. The mapping into predicate calculus consists of a simple rule for translating RDF statements into first-order relational sentences and a set of first-order logic axioms that restrict the allowable interpretations of the non-logical symbols (i.e., relations, functions, and constants) in each language. Since RDF-S and DAML+OIL are both vocabularies of non-logical symbols added to RDF, the translation of RDF statements is sufficient for translating RDF-S and DAML+OIL as well. The axioms are written in ANSI Knowledge Interchange Format (KIF), which is a proposed ANSI standard. The axioms use standard first-order logic constructs plus KIF-specific relations and functions dealing with lists.[1] Lists as objects in the domain of discourse are needed in order to axiomatize RDF containers and the DAML+OIL properties dealing with cardinality..." See "DARPA Agent Mark Up Language (DAML)."

• [June 26, 2001] "Department of Defense Adopts StarOffice." By Peter Galli. In eWEEK (June 25, 2001). "In a significant win for open source desktop productivity suites, Sun Microsystems Inc. today announced that the U.S. Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) would implement up to 25,000 units of its StarOffice 5.2 software. StarOffice, Sun's open source productivity application suite that includes word processing, spreadsheets, presentations, and database applications for the Solaris, Windows and Linux platforms, would replace Applix on more than 10,000 of DISA's Unix workstations at 600 client organizations worldwide, said Susan Grabau, the product line manager for StarOffice. DISA has already begun implementing StarOffice as the automation Unix desktop solution for its Global Command and Control System, she said. The deal had not cost DISA anything as there was no license fee associated with StarOffice, and the federal government already had extensive support contracts with Sun which would cover this implementation, she said...Sun is also on track to release StarOffice 6 later this year. Iyer Venkatesan, the senior product manager for StarOffice, told eWeek in late April that StarOffice 6 would include the recently finalized XML file format specifications, which would make file sharing far easier. 'Files will now be able to be saved in either an XML format or in the current binary format. The lets users easily share information across applications, and will simplify the importing and exporting of files from different programs while greatly improving file sharing and readability,' he said." See references in "StarOffice XML File Format."

• [June 26, 2001] "An Introduction to XQuery. A look at the W3C's proposed standard for an XML query language." By Howard Katz (Fatdog Software). From IBM developerWorks. June 2001. ['Howard Katz introduces the W3C's XQuery specification, currently winding its way toward Recommendation status after emerging from a long incubation period behind closed doors. The complex specification consists of six separate working drafts, with more to come. This article provides some background history, a road map into the documentation, and an overview of some of the technical issues involved in the specification. A sidebar takes a quick look at some key features of XQuery's surface syntax. Code samples demonstrate the difference between XQuery and XQueryX and show examples of the surface syntax.'] "The W3C's XQuery specification has been in the works for a long time. The initial query language workshop that kicked things off was hosted by the W3C in Boston in December 1998. Invited representatives from industry, academia, and the research community at the workshop had an opportunity to present their views on the features and requirements they considered important in a query language for XML. The 66 presentations, which are all available online, came mainly from members of two very distinct constituencies: those working primarily in the domain of XML as-document (largely reflecting XML's original roots in SGML), and those working with XML as-data -- the latter largely reflecting XML's ever-increasing presence in the middleware realm, front-ending traditional relational databases. The working group is large by W3C standards (I'm told that only the Protocol Working Group has a larger membership). Its composition of some 30-odd member companies reflects the views of both constituencies. What's now starting to coalesce into final form is an XML query language standard that very ably manages to represent the needs and perspectives of both communities. The key component of XQuery that will be most familiar to XML users is XPath, itself a W3C specification. A solitary XPath location path standing on its own (//book/editor meaning 'find all book editors in the current collection') is perfectly valid XQuery. On the data side, XQuery's SQL-like appearance and capabilities will be both welcome and familiar to those coming in from the relational side of the world..." See references in (1) "XML Syntax for XQuery 1.0 (XQueryX) Published as W3C Working Draft" and (2) "XML and Query Languages."

• [June 26, 2001] "Users Seek Web Services Clarity." By Jack McCarthy, Tom Sullivan, Eugene Grygo, and Cathleen Moore. In InfoWorld (June 22, 2001). "While industry vendors climb over one another to get to the top of the Web services heap, users are opting for caution until critical technology and business issues are resolved. Concerns about hazy pricing and potential interoperability problems have surfaced as vendors dash to differentiate themselves in the standards race. But far and away the biggest question looms over security... Stumbling blocks or not, major vendors this month plugged Web services and plowed full-steam ahead with initiatives. This week, Microsoft heralded the second beta of Visual Studio.NET and the .NET Framework, its tools for building Web services. Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates described Visual Studio.NET as the centerpiece development product of the .NET strategy. Sun Microsystems recently unveiled Sun Open Net Environment and this week teamed with Oracle to offer a kit for moving Windows code, data, and applications to Java 2 Enterprise Edition (J2EE). Lotus Development embraced the model by unveiling Workflow 3.0 to offer a graphical system for managing business processes that integrate with standards-compliant Web-based applications. Debuting at this week's DevCon show, the Workflow upgrade includes support for Java APIs, XML, and other standards, allowing developers to easily build Internet-based workflow applications. Available this fall, Workflow will also offer Lotus Sametime instant messaging and support for Linux. Lotus parent company IBM and Hewlett-Packard are also on board with the WebSphere application server and Core Services Framework, respectively. Analysts say that momentum is building but that users have time to sort through the hype and discover how Web services can benefit them... Behind the growing interest in Web services are the promises of cost savings in application development as well as more powerful e-business interactions when business processes are exposed. The model has already attracted many enterprises to set up limited systems as they wait for Web services to evolve. Ahead of the curve, Dollar Rent A Car Systems, based in Tulsa, Okla., has been one of the early adopters of Web services. The company set up a link from Southwest Airlines' Web site to Dollar's reservation system using Microsoft's SOAP (Simple Object Access Protocol) Toolkit and a Windows 2000 Server. Visitors can now rent a car from Dollar without leaving Southwest's site... The standards debate remains another unresolved Web services issue. XML, UDDI (Universal Description, Discovery, and Integration), SOAP, and WSDL (Web Services Description Language) 'are the Four Horsemen of Web services; everybody loves them,' said Dana Gardner, an analyst at Aberdeen Group in Boston. But the evolution of the standards will parallel what has occurred in other technologies in that 'there will be less agreement as people look for differentiation,' Gardner added."

• [June 25, 2001] "E-book Project Highlights Role of DOI in Selling Digital Content." By Mark Walter. In Seybold Report: Analyzing Publishing Technology [ISSN: 1533-9211] Volume 1, Number 6 (June 18, 2001), pages 8-12. ['As standards for numbering and metadata come into focus, the "bar code for digital content" will be grease for the e-commerce distribution chain driving sales of digital goods.'] "The work of proving the viability of the DOI in a commercial e-book setting is the task of the DOI-EB initiative, and the first fruits of this pioneering project were unveiled late last month at a panel at the Book Expo America show in Chicago... The importance of the DOI-EB project is that it creates a public demo that helps educate the community about how DOIs can operate in the context of e-books. At the same time, it fleshes out the improvements that must be made to its system for all parties -- publishers, retailers and distributors -- to adopt the DOI. The project also has implications for fledgling efforts to get cross-vendor compatibility in digital rights management (DRM). Of the three areas where DRM vendors agree standardization can occur in the near term -- numbering, metadata and rights language -- the DOI-EB project identifies answers to two of those. Bob Bolick, the director of new business development at McGraw-Hill Professional and a leading participant in several of the DRM working groups, pointed out the importance of the project in that context: 'Because an identifier standard and metadata standard are key to achieving some form of interoperability among digital rights management systems and e-book formats, this DOI-EB work strikes me as one of the most important standards efforts occurring in our industry this year.' The DOI Foundation has also anounced its support for efforts to extend the original Indecs work to rights-related terms... it's important to look at how the DOI dovetails with other standards efforts and technology developments taking place on the Net. Here, too, we see encouraging signs. Norman Paskin, the IDF's director, has been an active ambassador for the DOI, acting as a liaison with rights-management committees in the Internet Engineering Task Force, WorldWide Web Consortium and MPEG. DOIs already can be expressed as Universal Resource Names (URNs), the IETF's syntax for generic resources, and the DOI is compatible with OpenURL, a proposed syntax for embedding parameters -- such as identifiers and metadata -- into hyperlinks. Paskin said he expects the DOI to shortly issue the DOI Namespace, its data dictionary for about 800 metadata elements spanning e-books, journals and audio and video material. The DOI has also started a working group to develop a services definition interface that would make DOI services available to a variety of Web-enabled systems. In short, although DOI was initiated by commercial publishers to help them sell intellectual property, its implementation is being carefully crafted to complement other standards and technology developments being developed for the Web and Internet at large." See also: "XML and Digital Rights Management (DRM)."

• [June 25, 2001] "Government Data Standards Catalogue. Volume 1 - General Principles." By [UK] e-Government Interoperability Framework (e-GIF). Issue: 0.5 For Public Consultation, 15/05/01. "The [UK] e-Government Interoperability Framework (e-GIF) mandates the adoption of XML and the development of XML schemas as the cornerstone of the government interoperability and integration strategy. A key element in the development of XML schemas is an agreed set of data standards. The Government Data Standards Catalogue sets out the rationale, approach and rules for setting and agreeing the set of Government Data Standards (GDS) to be used in the schemas and other interchange processes. It also contains the standards agreed to date. These standards are also recommended for data storage at the business level. The Catalogue comprises 3 volumes: Volume 1 sets out the general principles, i.e., the rationale, approach and rules for setting standards; Volume 2 sets out the Data Types standards; Volume 3 sets out the Data Items standards. References: see "e-Government Interoperability Framework (e-GIF)." [source]

• [June 25, 2001] "Government Data Standards Catalogue. Volume 2 - Data Types Standards. By [UK] e-Government Interoperability Framework (e-GIF). Issue: 0.5 For Public Consultation, 15/05/01. See previous entry for description. Data Types Examples: "Amount Sterling, BS7666 Address, Date, E-Mail Address, Forename, Individual Full Name, International Postal Address, Name Suffix, Postcode, Requested Name, Surname, Time, Title, UK Postal Address, UK Telephone Number." Volume 3 is not yet published (2001-06-25). References: see "e-Government Interoperability Framework (e-GIF)." [source]

• [June 25, 2001] "OASIS Security Services Technical Committee Glossary.". Reference: 'draft-sstc-ftf3-glossary-00' (incorporates draft-sstc-glossary-00). 20-June-2001. 23 pages. "This document comprises an overall glossary for the OASIS Security Services Technical Committee (SSTC) and its subgroups. Individual SSTC documents and/or subgroup documents may either reference this document and/or import select subsets of terms. The sources for the terms and definitions herein are referenced in Appendix A. Please refer to those sources for definitions of terms not explicitly defined here. Where possible and convenient, hypertext links directly to definitions within the aforementioned sources are included. Some definitions are quoted directly from the sources, some are modified to fit the context of the OASIS SSTC (aka SAML) effort..." See (1) "Draft Documents Available for the Security Assertion Markup Language (SAML)" and (2) "Security Assertion Markup Language (SAML)."

• [June 23, 2001] "Requirements for a Rights Data Dictionary and Rights Expression Language." In response to ISO/IEC JTC1/SC29/WG11 N4044: 'Reissue of the Call for Requirements for a Rights Data Dictionary and a Rights Expression Language -- MPEG-21, March 2001.' By [David Parrott] Reuters. 1 June 2001. Version 1.0. 62 pages. "This document describes Reuters requirements for a Rights Expression Language and Rights Data Dictionary (RDD-REL) in response to the call for requirements made by the MPEG-21 Requirements Committee... Digital Rights Management has for some time been closely linked with the technique of encrypting data files and managing the distribution and application of cryptographic keys in order to limit who can access the content and the manner in which access can take place. That technique is more appropriately labelled 'Digital Rights Enforcement' since it is more about enforcing rights than specifying and managing them. Moreover, even when enforcement is the goal, one might consider a whole array of implementation techniques which may or may not rely on encryption technology. In truth, the management of rights in the digital domain is far wider than the rather restrictive case outlined above. Rights (and obligations) management touches on numerous areas close to the hearts of many companies dealing in intellectual property (IP). Laying enforcement issues to one side, the value cannot be understated of simply being able to describe in a machine readable, standard format, the requirements of an IP owner on all other participants in the value chain. Those requirements can be described, broadly, as Rights and Obligations...A basic requirement for Rights and Obligations management systems to be successful is the ability to communicate Rights and Obligations in a standard form. Machine-readability is key to the dynamic specification of electronic contracts which is, in turn, critical to the dynamic construction of value-chains. A single Rights Expression Language should be common to all aspects of commercial activity. In that way alone, straight through rules processing is made possible. Rights and obligations can be created by different participants in the value-chain and layered upon each other. Data from different sources can be mixed freely without compromising the IP Rights of any of the rights holders. At the same time, the rights of individuals and downstream recipients of content must be protected..." Document source: see the posting from David Parrott (Reuters Limited) of 21-June-2001 to the XACML TC list, and the .ZIP file. Note relevant to the XACML TC discussion: "... I am forwarding FYI Reuters response to MPEG-21's call for requirements for their Rights Data Dictionary and Rights Expression Language. A key point to note is that the response describes a number of features to be included in MPEG's rights expression language that overlap with many of the "differences" I recently heard Simon list between XACML and DRM. These include: (1) fine granularity; (2) the use of rights expressions as policies to drive all manner of enforcement implementations (e.g., file system access, database access, services such as CORBA access, etc); (3) dynamically changing rights (not limited to static objects); (4) predicating rights of access on complex contextual information. There are many others. It would be useful to get people's thoughts on just how close the XACML and MPEG-21 activities are likely to become..." For background, see: (1) "MPEG Rights Expression Language (REL)"; (2) "Extensible Access Control Markup Language (XACML)"; and (3) "XML and Digital Rights Management (DRM)."

• [June 23, 2001] "Digital Rights Management (DRM) Architectures." By Renato Iannella (Chief Scientist, IPR Systems). In D-Lib Magazine [ISSN: 1082-9873] Volume 7, Number 6 (June 2001). "Digital Rights Management poses one of the greatest challenges for content communities in this digital age. Traditional rights management of physical materials benefited from the materials' physicality as this provided some barrier to unauthorized exploitation of content. However, today we already see serious breaches of copyright law because of the ease with which digital files can be copied and transmitted. Previously, Digital Rights Management (DRM) focused on security and encryption as a means of solving the issue of unauthorized copying, that is, lock the content and limit its distribution to only those who pay. This was the first-generation of DRM, and it represented a substantial narrowing of the real and broader capabilities of DRM. The second-generation of DRM covers the description, identification, trading, protection, monitoring and tracking of all forms of rights usages over both tangible and intangible assets including management of rights holders relationships. Additionally, it is important to note that DRM is the 'digital management of rights' and not the 'management of digital rights'. That is, DRM manages all rights, not only the rights applicable to permissions over digital content. In designing and implementing DRM systems, there are two critical architectures to consider. The first is the Functional Architecture, which covers the high-level modules or components of the DRM system that together provide an end-to-end management of rights. The second critical architecture is the Information Architecture, which covers the modeling of the entities within a DRM system as well as their relationships. (There are many other architectural layers that also need to be considered, such as the Conceptual, Module, Execution, and Code layers, but these architectures will not be discussed in this article.) This article discusses the Functional and Information Architecture domains and provides a summary of the current state of DRM technologies and information architectures... For an example of a rights language, see the Open Digital Rights Language. ODRL lists the many potential terms for permissions, constraints, and obligations as well as the rights holder agreements. As such terms may vary across sectors, rights languages should be modeled to allow the terms to be managed via a Data Dictionary and expressed via the language... Second generation DRM software is now providing some of the Architectures described in this article in deployed solutions. A typical example from the E-book sector is the OzAuthors online ebook store. OzAuthors is a service provided by the Australian Society of Authors in a joint venture with IPR Systems. Their goal is to provide an easy way for Society members (including Authors and Publishers) to provide their content (ebooks) to the market place at low cost and with maximum royalties to content owners [example]... All of this information is encoded in XML using the ODRL rights language. This encoding will enable the exchange of information with other ebook vendors who support the same language semantics, and will set the stage for complete and automatic interoperability... DRM standardization is now occurring in a number of open organizations. The OpenEBook Forum and the MPEG group are leading the charge for the ebook and multimedia sectors. The Internet Engineering Task Force [IETF] has also commenced work on lower level DRM issues, and the World Wide Web Consortium held a DRM workshop recently. Their work will be important for the entire DRM sector, and it is also important that all communities be heard during these standardization processes in industry and sector-neutral standards organizations." See: "XML and Digital Rights Management (DRM)."

• [June 23, 2001] "A Digital Object Approach to Interoperable Rights Management: Finely-grained Policy Enforcement Enabled by a Digital Object Infrastructure." By John S. Erickson (Hewlett-Packard Laboratories). In D-Lib Magazine [ISSN: 1082-9873] Volume 7, Number 6 (June 2001). "This article builds upon previous work in the areas of access control for digital information objects; models for cross-organizational authentication and access control; DOI-based applications and services; and ongoing efforts to establish interoperability mechanisms for digital rights management (DRM) technologies (e.g., eBooks). It also serves as a follow-up to my April 2001 D-Lib Magazine article, where I argued that the introduction of additional levels of abstraction (or logical descriptions) above the current generation of DRM technologies could facilitate various levels of interoperability and new service capabilities. Here I advocate encapsulating data structures of heterogeneous information items as digital objects and providing them with a uniform service interface. I suggest adopting a generic information object services layer on top of existing, interoperable protocol stacks. I also argue that a uniform digital object services layer properly rests above existing layers for remote method invocation, including IIOP, XML-RPC or SOAP. Many of the components suggested within this article are not new. What I believe is new is the call for an identifiable information object services layer, the identification of an application layer above it, and the clear mapping of an acceptable cross-organizational authentication and access control model onto digital object services... One aspect of the previously missing infrastructure was an object serialization, or structured storage, model that could be readily adopted across applications and platforms. We now have that model with the emergence of XML. In general, an advantage that data models with explicit structure have is that they naturally accommodate mechanisms for binding policy expressions to structural sub-trees within the information object hierarchies they represent. My focus here is on fine-grained policy expression and enforcement. Or, perhaps more accurately, policy expression at an appropriate level of granularity, since it is clear that not all object behaviors may require uniquely expressed policies. Generally, policy expression concerns the creation of tuples relating subjects, objects and actions, where in this context a 'subject' can be (loosely) thought of as a requestor for a service, an 'object' as a specific service (or behavior) of an information object, and an 'action' as some permissible action..." See: "XML and Digital Rights Management (DRM)."

• [June 22, 2001] "CTO Forum: Ballmer Pushes .NET, XML for Web Services." By Matt Berger. In InfoWorld (June 22, 2001). "Speaking to a room full of chief technology officers and other industry executives about Microsoft's new vision for building and delivering its software, Chief Executive Officer Steve Ballmer attempted to explain why the company's .NET initiative and all the software products built around it will enable the next generation of business and the Internet. Software will no longer be packaged and sold to customers on a CD, and applications will no longer be static programs that sit on a desktop or run off of a server, Ballmer said during a speech Thursday at the InfoWorld CTO Forum here. Instead, he said, they will be delivered over the Internet as services that allow customers to interact with them dynamically... Using many of the same phrases from earlier presentations on the subject, Ballmer called XML the 'lingua franca of the Internet,' saying it will drive the evolution of the Internet and Web services. 'This is the XML Revolution,' he said. 'I think this will be as big or even bigger than any revolution that preceded it. 'This is why XML lies at the heart of Microsoft's .NET initiative, Ballmer said, adding that Microsoft has begun to incorporate support for XML in every part of its product line, from servers to desktop software to development tools, and the company is trying to convince partners, customers, and developers to do the same. It signals a new strategy from Microsoft that it is betting all of its chips on XML as the standard for developing its software to deliver new applications and Web services, said Steve Jurvetson, managing director of Silicon Valley venture firm Draper Fisher Jurvetson, who attended the event. Microsoft's decision to embrace XML, as well as support from other parts of the software industry, will pay off in the long run, said Tim Bray, the co-inventor of XML, who attended the CTO Forum as a representative of his new company Antarcti.ca Systems... XML is built into Microsoft's forthcoming Windows XP operating system, for example. The latest release of its Office productivity suite, Office XP, also incorporates hints of how Microsoft plans to use XML, such as its Smart Tags function, which delivers information from the Web via hyperlinks within applications. The company has also made XML an integral part of its Visual Studio.NET developer products and the .NET Framework. Microsoft delivered beta 2 versions of both of those products to developers this week at its TechEd conference in Atlanta..."

• [June 22, 2001] Security Assertions Markup Language. Core Assertion Architecture. Version 09. 20-June-2001. Edited by P. Hallam-Baker. Contributions by Phillip Hallam-Baker, Tim Moses, Bob Morgan, Carlisle Adams, Charles Knouse, David Orchard, Eve Maler, Irving Reid, Jeff Hodges, Marlena Erdos, Nigel Edwards, and Prateek Mishra. From the OASIS SSTC and SAML work. "This document contains two sections. Section 1 contains the text proposed by the Core Assertions and Protocol group for the Core Assertions section of the SAML. Section 2 contains references to the material cited in the text. SAML specifies several different types of assertion for different purposes, these are: (1) Authentication Assertion: An authentication assertion asserts that the issuer has authenticated the specified subject. (2) Attribute Assertion: An attribute assertion asserts that the specified subject has the specified attribute(s). Attributes may be specified by means of a URI or through an extension schema that defines structured attributes. (3) Decision Assertion: A decision assertion reports the result of the specified authorization request. (4) Authorization Assertion: An authorization assertion asserts that a subject has been granted specific permissions to access one or more resources. The different types of SAML assertion are encoded in a common XML package, which at a minimum consists of: (1) Basic Information: Each assertion must specify a unique identifier that serves as a name for the assertion. In addition an assertion may specify the date and time of issue and the time interval for which the assertion is valid. (2) Claims: The claims made by the assertion. This document describes the use of assertions to make claims for Authorization and Key Delegation applications. In addition an assertion may contain the following additional elements. An SAML client is not required to support processing of any element contained in an additional element with the sole exception that an SAML client must reject any assertion containing a 'Conditions' element that is not supported. (3) Conditions: The assertion status may be subject to conditions. The status of the assertion might be dependent on additional information from a validation service. The assertion may be dependent on other assertions being valid. The assertion may only be valid if the relying party is a member of a particular audience. (4) Advice: Assertions may contain additional information as advice. The advice element may be used to specify the assertions that were used to make a policy decision. The SAML assertion package is designed to facilitate reuse in other specifications. For this reason XML elements specific to the management of authentication and authorization data are expressed as claims. Possible additional applications of the assertion package format include management of embedded trust roots [XTASS] and authorization policy information [XACML]..." See: "Security Assertion Markup Language (SAML)."

• [June 22, 2001] "Shibboleth Specification." DRAFT v1.0. Shibboleth Working Group Specification Document. 'draft-internet2-shibboleth-specification-00'. May 25, 2001. "This document provides the specifications for the Shibboleth system, including interfaces, message specifications, etc. This document should define Shibboleth in sufficient detail that (1) someone can implement the system without having to guess or interpret what was intended, and (2) separate but compliant implementations are guaranteed to interoperate.... The Shibboleth Model differs from the SAML model in a several key ways. It can be described as: (1) The SHIRE uses the WAYF Service to locate the User Home Organization. The WAYF produces a BLAH. (2) The SHIRE will send an Attribute Query Handle Request to the Handle Service (HS) to obtain a reference to the user. The HS will use the local web authentication mechanism to authenticate the browser user. However, instead of generating a Name Assertion, the HS will generate an attribute query handle (AQH - an opaque user handle), and return it in an Attribute Query Handle Response. Only the Attribute Authority will be able to map the AQH to a specific user. (3) The SHAR will send an Attribute Query Message to the Attribute Authority. The SHAR cannot ask for specific attributes; rather, the query should be understood to mean "give me all the attributes you can for this user for this target". The Attribute Authority will return an Attribute Query Reponse, containing assertions for all of the attributes it is authorized to release for this target. The Attribute Authority will likely obtain the attributes from the origin site's pre-existing Attribute Repository (e.g., Directory). (4) The Resource Manager will make an access decision, based on the supplied attributes, the target resource, and the requested operation. It will then either grant or deny access. It will not produce an Authorization Decision Assertion..." See the "Definition and explanation of SHAR/AA attribute request and response messages" with W3C XML Schema: "This document describes possible XML message formats for Shibboleth attribute request and response messages passed directly or indirectly between the SHAR and AA components of the Shibboleth architecture. The formats are expressed in the XML Schema Definition language." [Shibboleth, a project of MACE (Middleware Architecture Committee for Education), is investigating technology to support inter-institutional authentication and authorization for access to Web pages. Our intent is to support, as much as possible, the heterogeneous security systems in use on campuses today, rather than mandating use of particular schemes like Kerberos or X.509-based PKI. The project will produce an architectural analysis of the issues involved in providing such inter-institutional services, given current campus realities; it will also produce a pilot implementation to demonstrate the concepts."]

• [June 22, 2001] Network Data Management - Usage (NDM-U) For IP-Based Services. Version 2.5. April 12, 2001. 62 pages. Chief Editor: Steve Cotton (Cotton Management Consulting). "This document, in conjunction with the referenced Service Definition documents, is intended to specify technical information that is sufficient for practical implementations of interchange of usage data among service elements participating in the delivery of IP-based services, either within a single enterprise or across multiple enterprises. The IPDR organization intends to submit this specification to selected accredited organizations for consideration as an approved standard. This specification is divided into three major chapters: (1) IPDR Reference Model - a definition of the abstract and operational relationships between entities involved in the generation, recording, storage, transport, and processing of usage attributes. (2) Business Requirements - a definition of business requirements to be addressed by the protocol specification and specific scenarios for the major process flows anticipated in actual application. (3) Protocol - the notation, data unit syntax, and dynamic procedures involved in the operation of the interfaces specified in the reference model. IPDR stands for the Internet Protocol Detail Record, the name comes from the traditional telecom term CDR (Call Detail Record), used to record information about usage activity within the telecom infrastructure (such as a call completion). NDM-U stands for Network Data Management - Usage. It refers to a functional operation within the Telecom Management Forum's Telecom Operations Map. The NDM function collects data from devices and services in a service providers network. Usage refers to the type of data which is the focus of this document. Introduced in NDM-U 2.0, Service Specifications define the fields that should be present in IPDRDocs for each class of service. For example, the usage data captured for a Voice over IP call is very different from a query made to a Content-hosting Application Service Provider, so each requires its own Service Specification. The formal definition language for Service Specifications is XML DTDs [and XML Schema]. Service Specifications are updated or inaugurated to reflect changes in industry practice and new-generation capabilities that can roll out every month in the Internet world. Version 2 summary: "This revision introduces a major upgrade of the syntax notation of the protocol, namely XML Schema versus XML 1.0. This upgrade has been introduced to allow the protocol to specify strong typing of the usage attributes, thus conforming to the business requirements for data integrity. In addition, the dynamic operation of IDPR document transport has been specified, using the consensus choice for best conforming to business requirements, Simple Object Access Protocol (SOAP). Finally, the usage attributes for each of the services defined in the Business Requirements chapter are now formally specified, using the XML Schema definition supplied in the Protocol chapter." See also the [extracted] XML schema, perhaps also online as a separate document. References: "IPDR.org Network Data Management Usage Specification."

• [June 22, 2001] "Soapbox: Why XML Schema beats DTDs hands-down for data. A look at some data features of XML Schema" By Kevin Williams (Chief XML Architect, Equient - a division of Veridian). From IBM developerWorks. June 2001. ['In his turn on the Soapbox, info-management developer and author Kevin Williams tells why he's sold on XML Schema for the structural definition of XML documents for data. He looks at four features of XML Schema that are particularly suited to data representation, and he shows some examples of each. Code samples include XSD schemas and schema fragments.'] "As you're no doubt aware, the W3C recently promoted the XML Schema specification to Recommendation status, making that spec the XML structural definition language of choice. While most people find the specifications a little hard to read, the jargon conceals a very strong set of features, especially for those of us who are designing XML structures for data. I'd like to take a look at a few of those features. Strong typing is probably the biggest advantage XML Schema has over DTDs, and it is the aspect of XML Schema you've heard the most about. In a DTD, you don't have a whole lot of choices for constraining the allowable content of your elements and attributes... [Conclusion:] I've taken a brief look at some aspects of XML Schema that make schemas much better than DTDs for the definition of XML structures for data. While DTDs are likely to be around for a while yet (there are plenty of legacy documents that still rely on them for their structural definition), support for XML Schema is quickly being implemented for all the major XML software offerings. In the following months, I'll take a look at some of the ideas I've laid out here in greater depth in my forthcoming column." Article also in PDF format. For schema description and references, see "XML Schemas."

• [June 21, 2001] "Progressing the UN/CEFACT e-Business Standards Development Strategy." From United Nations Centre for Trade Facilitation And Electronic Business (UN/CEFACT). UN/CEFACT Steering Group (CSG) E-Business Team. General CSG eBTeam/2001/EBT0001 16-June-2001. "The UN/CEFACT Plenary endorsed the proposed strategy for achieving its e-Business vision 1 at its March 2001 meeting. Subsequently, the UN/CEFACT Steering Group (CSG) and OASIS announced the successful completion of the development stage of ebXML and reached an agreement for the allocation of responsibility for maintenance and further development of ebXML specifications. Under the agreement, UN/CEFACT will be responsible for Business Processes and Core Components. OASIS will be responsible for maintaining and advancing a series of technical specifications. Jointly, UN/CEFACT and OASIS will be responsible for marketing and developing the technical architecture specification. The CSG believe the most effective way forward is to bring together the expertise and resources of the UN/EDIFACT Working Group (EWG), the Business Process Analysis Working Group (BPAWG), the Codes Working Group (CDWG), and the Business Process and Core Component work from the ebXML initiative. The result is the consolidation of all these efforts into a new Working Group, the e-Business Working Group, that will be able to address the needs of all its users. This initiative will require considerable planning and consultation if it is to achieve its objectives within the projected time scale. To lead this process, the CSG has established a special e-Business Team to undertake the initial coordination and development work. This paper is the first deliverable of the e-Business Team. It provides the description and responsibilities of the new e-Business Working Group. ['This paper is intended to provide a notional description of the proposed e-Business Working Group and likely responsibilities. It is by no means fully inclusive of all requirements that will eventually be identified. It is intended to establish a baseline and context within which meaningful discussion and alternative proposals can be developed. All aspects of the organisation as well as the various duties will be confirmed through the approval of Mandates and Terms of Reference for the e-Business Working Group and each subgroup.'] See the communiqué from Ray Walker, "UN/CEFACT's Proposal for a New Electronic Business Working Group." References: "Electronic Business XML Initiative (ebXML)."

• [June 21, 2001] "Augmented Metadata in XHTML." Sun Microsystems Working Draft 21-June-2001. Edited by Murray Altheim (Sun Microsystems) and Sean B. Palmer. Draft version for feedback ('work in progress'). Abstract: "This specification describes several minor syntax modifications to XHTML (the XML transformation of HTML) which provide much of the essential functionality required to augment Web pages with metadata as found in published descriptions of the Semantic Web. This augmentation allows Dublin Core metadata, a highly popular standard developed by the library community to be incorporated in Web pages in a way that is compatible with today's Web browsers, and describes a generalized mechanism by which other popular schemas can be used in similar fashion. The metadata can be associated with any XHTML or XML document or document fragment (actually, any addressable resource), internal or external to the document." Detail: "This specification describes three minor modifications to XHTML 1.1 which provide much of the essential functionality required to augment Web pages with schema-characterized metadata, as according to the need expressed in published descriptions of the Semantic Web. Using the extensibility provided by the W3C Recommendation Modularization of XHTML, this specification includes an 'XHTML Augmented Metadata 1.0 DTD' that implements these features. The first two modifications are relatively trivial, in terms of implementation: (1) allow the <meta> element to appear within any block element as metadata about its parent (i.e., any major document component); (2) add an optional href attribute to the <meta> element to allow it to point to any addressable resource. The third modification is to: (3) add a Dublin Core module to XHTML, modifying the content model of the <meta> element to contain its content. [From the post to 'www-rdf-interest@w3.org': "I've been hesitant to announce this since it's not quite finished, but since you asked, here's a specification in the works that describes how to incorporate Dublin Core metadata within XHTML, so that Web pages can be harvested for their subject, author, etc. content. How this might occur is described in section 5.5.3. You'll note that this doesn't put RDF of any flavour into a Web page. That couldn't be validated, which is one of the requirements of the project, and in terms of being globally useful, allowing every author in the world to create their own flavour of metadata isn't a particularly compelling need; we all need to agree on using the same "carrier" with a small number of controlled vocabularies. Dublin Core fits this bill as a very popular way of capturing a subset of the kinds of metadata described in things I've read about the Semantic Web. There's also a section on how to work this with topic maps..." Related references in (1) "Dublin Core Metadata Initiative (DCMI)" and in (2) "XHTML and 'XML-Based' HTML Modules."

• [June 21, 2001] "DAML-S: Semantic Markup For Web Services." By David Martin. 2001-05-23 or later. "The Semantic Web should enable greater access not only to content but also to services on the Web. Users and software agents should be able to discover, invoke, compose, and monitor Web resources offering particular services and having particular properties. As part of the DARPA Agent Markup Language program, we have begun to develop an ontology of services, called DAML-S, that will make these functionalities possible. This white paper describes the overall structure of the ontology, the service profile for advertising services, and the process model for the detailed description of the operation of services. We also compare DAML-S with several industry efforts to define standards for characterizing services on the Web... DAML-S is an attempt to provide an ontology, within the framework of the DARPA Agent Markup Language, for describing Web services. It will enable users and software agents to automatically discover, invoke, compose, and monitor Web resources offering services, under specified constraints. We have released an initial version of DAML-S. It can be found at the URL: http://www.daml.org/services/daml-s. We expect to enhance it in the future in ways that we have indicated in the paper, and in response to users' experience with it. We believe it will help make the Semantic Web a place where people can not only find out information but also get things done." See the document DAML-S 0.5 Draft Release (May 2001): "This directory contains a draft version of the DAML-S language under development by a group of DAML researchers. We encourage feedback from interested parties. DAML-S is a DAML-based Web service ontology, which supplies Web service providers with a core set of markup language constructs for describing the properties and capabilities of their Web services in unambiguous, computer-intepretable form. DAML-S markup of Web services will facilitate the automation of Web service tasks including automated Web service discovery, execution, composition and interoperation. Following the layered approach to markup language development, the current version of DAML-S builds on top of DAML+OIL (March 2001), and subsequent versions will likely build on top of DAML-L." See "DARPA Agent Mark Up Language (DAML)."

• [June 20, 2001] "XML Blueberry Requirements." W3C Working Draft 20-June-2001. Edited by John Cowan (Reuters). Latest version URL: http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-blueberry-req. Abstract: "This document lists the design principles and requirements for the Blueberry revision of the XML Recommendation, a limited revision of XML 1.0 being developed by the World Wide Web Consortium's XML Core Working Group solely to address character set issues." Detail: "The W3C's XML 1.0 Recommendation was first issued in 1998, and despite the issuance of many errata culminating in a Second Edition of 2001, has remained (by intention) unchanged with respect to what is well-formed XML and what is not. This stability has been extremely useful for interoperability. However, the Unicode Standard on which XML 1.0 relies has not remained static, evolving from version 2.0 to version 3.1. Characters present in Unicode 3.1 but not in Unicode 2.0 may be used in XML character data, but are not allowed in XML names such as element type names, attribute names, processing instruction targets, and so on. In addition, some characters that should have been permitted in XML names were not, due to oversights and inconsistencies in Unicode 2.0. As a result, fully native-language XML markup is not possible in at least the following languages: Amharic, Burmese, Canadian aboriginal languages, Cantonese (Bopomofo script), Cherokee, Dhivehi, Khmer, Mongolian (traditional script), Oromo, Syriac, Tigre, Yi. In addition, Chinese, Japanese, Korean (Hangul script), and Vietnamese can make use of only a limited subset of their complete character repertoires. In addition, XML 1.0 attempts to adapt to the line-end conventions of various modern operating systems, but discriminates against the convention used on IBM and IBM-compatible mainframes. XML 1.0 documents generated on mainframes must either violate the local line-end conventions, or employ otherwise unnecessary translation phases before and after XML parsing and generation. A new XML version, rather than a set of errata to XML 1.0, is being created because the change affects the definition of well-formed documents: XML 1.0 processors must continue to reject documents that contain new characters in XML names or new line-end conventions. It is presumed that the distinction between XML 1.0 and XML Blueberry will be indicated by the XML declaration..." See the 'www-xml-blueberry-comments' mailing list archives and related references in "XML and Unicode."

• [June 20, 2001] "Microsoft's Ballmer: .NET is About Integration." By Michael Vizard and Mark Jones. In InfoWorld Issue 25 (June 18, 2001), pages 20-22. "As part of an ambitious effort to create an architecture that fosters data and application integration, Microsoft has laid out a broad foundation based on XML technologies that will be marketed under the name of Microsoft.NET. In an interview with InfoWorld Editor in Chief Michael Vizard and West Coast News Editor Mark Jones, Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer, who will be a keynote speaker at the InfoWorld CTO Forum this week, talks about how he sees this 'bet-the-company' strategy paying off for Microsoft customers and its industry allies. [Q: Why should corporations pay any attention to Microsoft.NET today?] Ballmer: There's a ton of information that is essentially locked in back-office systems today. We want to help [companies] bring that information together in new applications. We want to help them expose the information to the consumer. The way we would propose doing that is to essentially wrap it via XML and then build next-generation applications that pull things together using the XML infrastructure. This is about enterprise application integration. This is about business-to-business. This is about unlocking, getting knowledge of back-office systems to front office. [Q: What's the core business model behind Microsoft.NET?] Ballmer: We will build software, servers, and tools that have .NET-and XML-platform capability built-in, and we will sell those as we sell software today. We will also have a set of services that you should think of as sort of customer-facing as opposed to developer-facing. These will be advanced services for consumers and knowledge workers that use an XML data store that the user has running on the Internet. These additional services on top of that somebody might subscribe to as part of Windows or on top of Windows or on top of Office, etc. We will also charge developers some [sort of] fixed fee to use our services per year because there's real operational costs in serving a developer. But we don't have any model under consideration that calls for transaction fees and that sort of thing... [Q: What are the major points of difference between you and Sun about the role of XML?] Ballmer: XML is a message format, but it also implies a programming model. I don't send you a Java program that you run. I send you an XML message and you send me back an XML message. Yes, it's a data exchange format, but it is also the backbone for the way you write loosely coupled applications that extend one another and complement one another and work together. I don't think Sun gets that, frankly. Or maybe they do get it but strategically it is inopportune for them to get it..."

• [June 20, 2001] "Microsoft Fires .NET Arrows at Java." By Tom Sullivan and Ed Scannell. In InfoWorld Issue 25 (June 18, 2001), pages 17-20. "Just two weeks after rival Sun Microsystems and its Java partners ballyhooed Web services at JavaOne, Microsoft will fire back this week with its own salvo. The company will use its TechEd developers conference in Atlanta to extol the advantages of integrating enterprise systems with Web services. Bill Gates, Microsoft chairman and chief software architect, will announce the availability of Visual Studio.NET beta 2. The final version, planned to ship later this year, allows developers to create components with native XML interfaces that can interoperate with other Web services. Microsoft will bolster its heavy bet on XML -- via its .NET initiative -- with a demonstration of Yukon, the forthcoming SQL Server version. Yukon's Web services-applicable features include XML processing and the ability to store XML natively in the database. When it ships, Yukon will support multiple languages within the database via the Common Language Runtime (CLRT) so any language that supports CLRT can be stored in the database... [MS'] Flessner will kick off the conference Monday, explaining how XML Web services solve the enterprise integration problem, whether that is system-to-system integration or feeding data from one application to a variety of Internet access devices. "There is important business value that can be derived from connecting directly to your partners and customers," said Barry Goffe, group manager for Microsoft .NET. The company is determined to outgun rivals IBM and Sun by providing a better implementation of XML-based Web services standards in its .NET tools and servers. With its CLRT woven tightly into Visual Studio.NET, Microsoft believes its technology will have broader appeal than Sun's because developers can write in any language they choose, not just Java. Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer said Microsoft is betting on XML against just one language. 'Java is inadequate and the way that applications will be extended will be by responding to XML messages. It won't be by sending somebody a Java program,' he said. Microsoft's rivals expect it to distort the open standards, notably UDDI (Universal Description, Discovery, and Integration), SOAP (Simple Object Access Protocol), and WSDL (Web Services Description Language)... Other companies are not convinced that the XML-based Web services that any of the vendors are selling offer the best means to build Web services-like functionality. Ameritrade, an online brokerage in Omaha, Neb., is using BEA's Tuxedo at the middleware layer and Java to deliver its brokerage services. 'We are putting components in at the middleware level, as opposed to doing it at the XML level,' said CIO Jim Ditmore..."

• [June 20, 2001] "RealNetworks Pushes Copyright Initiative." By Melanie Austria Farmer and Jim Hu. In CNET News.com (June 20, 2001). "Streaming-media giant RealNetworks on Wednesday unveiled new technology intended to promote the legal use of copyrighted material over the Web. The company is aiming the software in its RealSystem Media Commerce Suite at media companies and retailers that want to deliver music, movies and other copyrighted material securely over the Web. The software can be tied into existing systems for delivery of digital content. RealNetworks also introduced an initiative to provide a common, open standard--called XMCL, for Extensible Media Commerce Language--that would enable the content to be played on systems from different providers of digital entertainment. Supporters include media and technology notables such as IBM, Napster, InterTrust, Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Sony Pictures Digital Entertainment and Sun Microsystems. The moves are likely to heighten the already intense competition between RealNetworks and Microsoft, both of which distribute technology that allows consumers to watch videos or listen to music over the Web... Microsoft countered Wednesday with its own set of announcements. The Redmond, Wash.-based software giant unveiled Microsoft Producer, a system that lets people incorporate Windows Media audio and video technology into their business presentations. In addition, the company said it will begin highlighting how media and entertainment companies such as EMI Recorded Music, Viacom's CBS NewsPath and Lions Gate Entertainment are using its Windows Media digital rights management system... The control of copyrighted materials online falls into the realm of digital rights management, which will play an increasingly important role as online music becomes more popular with consumers. Content producers such as record labels and movie studios have generally acknowledged the Internet as a new way to sell and distribute their works. But the lack of safeguards preventing the unwanted dissemination of their works has made content providers more conscious of copyright abuses on the Internet. Thus, many content companies have proceeded slowly, waiting for a sufficient way to secure their works... The XMCL proposal envisions a way for digital content to be played independently of rights management systems and codecs. Codecs are the mathematical codes that compress large audio files into smaller, more usable packages that can be streamed or downloaded over the Web." See: "Extensible Media Commerce Language (XMCL)."

• [June 20, 2001] "RealNetworks Unveils Digital Rights Standard, Products." By 'Reuters'. In InternetWeek (June 18, 2001). "Media software maker RealNetworks Inc. on Wednesday launched a new product it says will help entertainment conglomerates manage and track the use of their copyrighted material on new online services they plan to soon roll out. RealNetworks also unveiled an initiative to standardize the delivery of content via the Web in a way that is secure and profitable, marking what analysts said was the Seattle-based company's boldest move yet to tackle a main strength of competing technology by cross-town rival Microsoft Corp... Although the more technical of the announcements, Real's standardization initiative could pose a bigger threat to Microsoft, analysts said. Real's proposed standard is called the eXtensible Media Commerce Language, or XMCL, a media-oriented version of the XML (eXtensible Markup Language) standard that companies like Microsoft are betting heavily on to enable a new generation of Web-based services. Just as XML describes different types of data so different computer systems can talk to each other, XMCL would be a common language for describing the rights and rules for a piece of media like a song or a film, Albertson said... The other pillar of Real's strategy is a product called the RealSystem Media Commerce Suite, which will let online music and video stores easily package, sell and deliver their wares to customers, Albertson said..." See: "Extensible Media Commerce Language (XMCL)."

• [June 20, 2001] "Big Guns Take Aim at Digital Copyright Management." By Sumner Lemon and Stephen Lawson. In InfoWorld (June 20, 2001). "Backed by some of the biggest names in the online entertainment industry, RealNetworks on Wednesday announced the formation of the XMCL (Extensible Media Commerce Language) Initiative. The company said the initiative will define an open XML-based framework for managing rights to digital media, including applications such as purchase, rental, video-on-demand, and subscription services. The list of companies that are backing the XMCL Initiative includes media-industry heavyweights such as Bertelsmann, EMI Group, Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios (MGM), and AOL Time Warner. But Microsoft, which has its own digital-rights management framework built around the Windows Media Format 7 file format, is conspicuously absent from the list. Digital rights management technologies allow copyright holders to control how movies and songs are used and distributed online. Also, the technologies can restrict the number of times a user can play a certain file, or prevent a file from being copied and passed on to other users. XMCL will simplify rights management by letting content providers define business rules in a standard way, RealNetworks said in a statement. Specific details of how XMCL would be implemented were not made available... RealNetworks announced the XMCL Initiative at the same time it launched its RealSystem Media Commerce Suite, a suite of multimedia content applications. The software will eventually support XMCL and give users the ability to choose from a variety of back-end platforms, the company said. RealSystem Media Commerce Suite can be integrated with third-party digital rights management applications, such as flexible rights management software from InterTrust Technologies, the statement said. InterTrust, which has filed a patent infringement suit against Microsoft over digital-rights management in Windows Media Player, is a member of the XMCL Initiative..." See the announcement, and XMCL main reference page.

• [June 20, 2001] "Making RDF Syntax Clear. Proposal of a DTD and minor syntax enhancement to RDF, to overcome many of the current practical difficulties." By Rick Jelliffe (Topologi Pty. Ltd.) 2001-06-20. "The current RDF Recommendation is almost impossible to implement because the discipline of a DTD was not used. Consequently, RDF implementations lack exchangability, and most people coming to the RDF Spec (from outside the 'RDF Community') expecting clear description of syntax must go away disappointed/ Furthermore, the advent of RDFS raises compatability issues, in that certain elements are used in RDFS, but are only general names in RDF. This proposal suggests the the situation could be improved by: [1] creating a normative DTD for RDF; [2] state clearly that this DTD (and DTDs that use it) embodies the RDF exchange current RDF exchange XML; [3] reconciles the use of namespaces in RDF with XML Schemas; [4] clarifies RDF's current syntax with standard concepts such as "architectures". I propose that this DTD should be included as a normative part of the RDF specification, and the BNF sections removed or reworded to fit in with it. From the 2001-06-20 posting to 'www-rdf-interest@w3.org': "I have posted to the RDF comments list a proposal for clarifying RDF syntax. This proposal features a new DTD, used to map between RDF documents and a notional XML Schemas schema using xsi:type. I have been working through RDF specifications and examples again recently, and I am even more convinced than ever that getting the basic discipline of the transfer syntax clear is a prerequisite for RDF becoming useful..." See "Resource Description Framework (RDF)."

• [June 20, 2001] "Simplified XML Syntax for RDF." By Jonathan Borden (Tufts University School of Medicine, The Open Healthcare Group). June 17, 2001 or later. "A simplified XML syntax for RDF is proposed. Its major differences with RDF 1.0 are: (1) namespace = http://www.openhealth.org/RDF/RDFSurfaceSyntax; (2) defined as tree regular expression; (3) attribute aboutQ="ex:name" accepts QName as value indicating subject; (4) attribute resourceQ="ex:value" accepts QName as value indicating object; (5) rdf:parseType="Resource" is default; (6) The subject or object of a statement may be either a URI reference, a qualified name, a quantified variable, another statement or a collection of statements; (7) ?x defines a quantified variable. XML Syntax: The XML syntax for RDF 1.0 can be described in terms of a tree regular expression. This form can be thought of as expressing constraints on the XML Infoset which arises when parsing an RDF document. The advantage of expressing the syntax in this form over EBNF, is that a tree regular expression (e.g., RELAXNG/TREX schema http://relaxng.org) already takes into account the rules of XML syntax + XML namespaces, e.g., correctly handles namespace prefixes, empty elements, mixed content, whitespace, attribute ordering etc. Such schemata are also described as 'hedge regular expressions' or 'hedge automata' [http://www.oasis-open.org/cover/hedgeAutomata.html]. The tree regular expression schema for RDF 1.0 is available [online]. This schema handles several proposed updates such as the requirement that the "rdf:about" and "rdf:ID" attributes be prefixed/qualified. A tree regular expression for the proposed syntax is available [online]..." See: "Resource Description Framework (RDF)" and "RELAX NG."

• [June 20, 2001] "RELAX NG schema for W3C XML Schema." Prepared by Jeni Tennison. Posted to 'relax-ng-comment@lists.oasis-open.org' on 20-Jun-2001. Comments: "I think that the XML Schema vocabulary is quite a neat showcase for RELAX NG because there are so many co-dependencies between attributes and between attributes and elements. This RELAX NG schema follows the XML Schema for XML Schema to a certain extent (using the same kind of naming scheme) to facilitate comparison between the two. I have also added comments about the ease with which the two handle different aspects of the vocabulary. I've tested it with Jing against various XML Schemas, and it seems to be working, though obviously if anyone spots any bugs please get in touch..." See: "RELAX NG." [cache 2001-06-20]

• [June 19, 2001] "XML Training Wheels. An XSLT and Java-based tool for producing tutorials -- custom-built for developerWorks but ready to adapt to your own use." By Doug Tidwell (Cyber evangelist, developerWorks). From IBM developerWorks. June 2001. ['See how developerWorks produced a custom XSLT application with Java-based open-source tools that automates the tedious work of producing the developerWorks HTML-based tutorials. Known as the Toot-O-Matic, the tool now is available for any developer either to inspect as an XSLT exemplar or to tailor to your own training needs. Doug Tidwell explains the design goals and the XML document design. He also describes how the 13 code samples demonstrate the techniques used in generating a truckload of HTML panels full of custom graphics, a ZIP file, and two PDF files from a single XML source document.'] "Here at developerWorks, we're pleased to release the source of the Toot-O-Matic, the XML-based tool we use to create our tutorials. In this article, we'll discuss the design decisions we made when we built the tool, talk about how you can use it to write your very own tutorials, and talk a little bit about how the source code is structured. We hope you find the tool useful, and that it will give you some ideas about how to use XML and XSLT style sheets to manipulate structured data in a variety of useful ways... In achieving the final goal of seeing how much we could do with XSLT, the Toot-O-Matic exercises all of the advanced capabilities of XSLT, including multiple input files, multiple output files, and extension functions. Through the style sheets, it converts a single XML document into: (1) A web of interlinked HTML documents; (2) A menu for the entire tutorial; (3) A table of contents for each section of the tutorial; (4) JPEG graphics containing the title text of all sections and the tutorial itself; (5) A letter-sized PDF file; (6) An A4-sized PDF file; (7) A ZIP file containing everything a user needs to run the tutorial on their machine... This discussion of the Toot-O-Matic tool illustrates the full range of outputs that you can generate from a single XML file. The structure of our original XML documents enables us to convert flat textual information into a number of different formats, all of which work together to deliver a single piece of content in a variety of interesting and useful ways. Using this tool, we have shortened and streamlined our development process, making it easier, faster, and cheaper to produce our tutorials. Best of all, everything we've described here is based on open standards and works on any Java-enabled platform. The Toot-O-Matic tool shows how a simple, inexpensive development project can deliver significant results." Also available in PDF format. For related resources, see "Extensible Stylesheet Language (XSL/XSLT)." [cache]

• [June 19, 2001] "Ferrets and Topic Maps: Knowledge Engineering for an Analytical Engine." By James David Mason Ph.D. Reference: Y/WPP-011. Paper presented at XML Europe 2001 (Paris). "The 'Ferret' analytical engine, developed originally by the Y-12 National Security Complex of the U.S. Department of Energy to seek classified data and associations in documents and present its findings in the light of formal rules, requires a structured information base that represents not just individual facts but a set of implications and a collection of rules. The fundamental knowledge base is evolving towards forms that enhance flexibility and portability. The developers early realized that the knowledge base can be captured in XML by a series of trees that represent taxonomies, analytical structures, and specific indicative facts, but over this a topic map is needed to express links across the trees. Above this, the classification rules could form another topic map that points into the lower layers. In its latest form, however, the knowledge base has come to be entirely represented in a topic map. The 'Ferret' engine combines sophisticated searching with rule-driven analysis and reporting. In its original application, the Ferret engine performs the equivalent of 5,000 simultaneous searches while reading documents at several thousand words per second. The analysis traces implications of concepts discovered in searching and applies the rules for interpreting implications and the actions to be taken when a significant piece of information is found. Because the topic maps that represent this knowledge can be switched easily, Ferret can be reprogrammed to many tasks, including selection and categorization, scanning of e-mail and newsfeeds, diagnostics, and query expansion, in addition to the original classification application..." [From the Conclusion:] "When we began work on the Ferret system, our goal was simply to construct a tool to help the ADCs review documents. . . The first knowledge base was actually based on one derived from the slow prototype we had studied. We realized that design was not maintainable and moved from it to our earliest XML representation. We eventually realized we needed to divorce the knowledge base from any connection to legacy technologies and to concern ourselves only with capturing the intellectual relationships among its components. By treating the Ferret engine as a black box and building the knowledge base using the XTM model, we have achieved a form in which the base will be both portable and maintainable, as well as potentially usable for more than simply controlling the Ferret engine. Even as the knowledge base has evolved, we have been rethinking the uses of the Ferret technology. Besides using it for its original purpose as an ADC's assistant, we have already used it for categorization projects and for scanning e-mail. We believe that with appropriate knowledge bases, Ferret could serve as a diagnostic tool or a mechanism for expanding queries. We are considering extending the reporting mechanism to write out new topic maps as the engine analyzes documents. The new topic maps might assist us in representinganalytical results in processes like classification, or they could serve as indexes for searching the documents that have been analyzed. If we are able to merge generated topic maps with those already in a knowledge base, we believe that we will have created an engine that is self-training within certain domains. As the topic-map technology gains acceptance and support, topic-map tools fromother sources may appear that we can integrate with the Ferret engine, creating even more interesting tools. Conversion of the knowledge base structure from its original form to topic maps is, I believe, the key to future growth of uses for our analytical engine..." Noted in JMason's trip report (Report of Official Foreign Travel to Germany 17 May-1 June 2001): "I presented a paper on the use of topic maps for building the knowledge base for the Ferret classification engine developed by Y-12. I had previously presented a preliminary approach to an XML knowledge base at an August 2000 GCA conference in Montréal. The current approach represents the entire knowledge base in the XTM application; the paper was well received." See: "(XML) Topic Maps." [cache]

• [June 19, 2001] "Document Object Model (DOM) Level 3 XPath Specification Version 1.0." W3C Working Draft 18-June-2001. Edited by Ray Whitmer (Netscape/AOL). Latest version URL: http://www.w3.org/TR/DOM-Level-3-XPath. "The W3C DOM Working Group has published a first public Working Draft of the Document Object Model (DOM) Level 3 XPath Specification. This is the result of discussions from the 'www-dom-xpath' mailing list, feedback from the 'xml-dev' mailing list, and work within in the W3C DOM Working Group." The draft specification "defines the Document Object Model Level 3 XPath; it provides simple functionalities to access a DOM tree using XPath 1.0. This module builds on top of the Document Object Model Level 3 Core." Background: "XPath is becoming an important part of a variety of many specifications including XForms, XPointer, XSL, CSS, and so on. It is also a clear advantage for user applications which use DOM to be able to use XPath expressions to locate nodes automatically and declaratively. But liveness issues have plagued each attempt to get a list of DOM nodes matching specific criteria, as would be expected for an XPath API. There have also traditionally been object model mismatches between DOM and XPath. This proposal specifies new interfaces and approaches to resolving these issues..." Available as a single HTML file; also in PDF and Postscript formats. See: "W3C Document Object Model (DOM)." [cache]

• [June 19, 2001] "Style sheets can write style sheets too. Making XSLT style sheets from XSLT components." By Alan Knox (Software Engineer, IBM, Hursley Park, Hampshire, England). From IBM developerWorks. June 2001. ['XSLT style sheets can be used to dynamically transform XML to complex presentation markup for browsers -- but if the presentation is complex, the style sheet will be too. What's needed is some tool that can build complex style sheets from simple components. Since XSLT is itself an XML, XSLT can be manipulated with XSLT; style sheets can write style sheets. This article shows how an XSLT style sheet that performs some particular runtime transformation can be built from XSLT components.'] "Another developerWorks article, 'Spinning your XML for screens of all sizes,' discusses problems with writing and managing style sheets that present the same XML basketball statistics on many display devices. The solution involved writing a parameterized style sheet that produces HTML with varying degrees of data content, and then transcoding the output from that style sheet for a specific device using WebSphere Transcoding Publisher. This is an effective and easy solution for many scenarios, but you lose some control over what appears on a user's screen. If you want: (1) Absolute control over what users see, (2) To tune presentation of your application to give the best possible experience on each device, (3) To make use of particular features of a device... Then you have to solve the problems of generating numerous, complex style sheets. This article demonstrates a no-compromise solution that uses the same basketball XML data... XSLT is a declarative language, where the templates that make up a style sheet are independent of each other. XSLT style sheets can be composed from other style sheets using the import and include mechanisms. With suitable care, you can independently develop a number of separate component style sheets that can be put together to make the presentation style sheet that will be applied to the XML data at runtime. These components will be broadly of three types, that deal with: Presenting dynamic XML data [the basketball data in my example]; Reusable bits of presentation mark-up, such as button bars; The residue of the page..." Article also available in PDF format. For related resources, see "Extensible Stylesheet Language (XSL/XSLT)."

• [June 19, 2001] "Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae Agree To XML Standard." By Robert Bryce. In Interactive Week (June 18, 2001). "Freddie Mac and its larger cousin, Fannie Mae, are fierce competitors in the secondary mortgage market. But the two companies could make paperless real estate purchases a reality, thanks to their support for Web-based mortgage transactions. Both organizations have agreed to support eXtensible Markup Language (XML) standards established by the Mortgage Industry Standards Maintenance Organization. That support will likely mean dramatic changes for hundreds of companies, from lenders to vendors, that participate in the domestic housing market. That market is expected to generate roughly $1.52 trillion worth of new mortgages this year. But the mortgage process is slowed and made more expensive by the reams of paper needed for loan applications, credit reports, surveys and other documents... Freddie Mac estimates that moving to the MISMO standard could reduce origination costs for each loan by up to $700 - savings that would be passed on to consumers. With 2000 revenue of $30 billion and $44 billion, respectively, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae are the monsters of the mortgage business. Together, they buy about two-thirds of all conventional single-family home mortgages. The two companies are government-sponsored enterprises created by Congress - and given access to federally backed lines of credit - to help promote home ownership. They buy mortgages from lenders, package them as securities and resell them on the open market to investors... Like many other companies, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae want to minimize the amount of paper they handle. The MISMO was created in January 2000 to create an XML format that could be used from the initial loan application through the '"securitization' of that loan on Wall Street and the servicing of the loan by vendors. 'The obstacle is getting consensus across the industry for what we call "data",' said Gabe Minton, senior director, industry technology, at the Mortgage Bankers Association of America, which oversees the MISMO. The current version of the MISMO standard enables the translation of 2,000 terms, including the borrower's name and address. But as the standard evolves and more paper-based elements of the mortgage process are converted into XML, the number of terms that the standard will define will likely exceed 4,000, Minton said..." See "Mortgage Bankers Association of America MISMO Standard."

• [June 19, 2001] "The Microsoft Shared Development Process." Microsoft white paper. June, 2001. "The Microsoft Shared Development Process (SDP) provides a mechanism for fast, focused and profitable collaboration on key technology initiatives between Microsoft and industry partners... As we enter a new paradigm in computing, we find an increased call for integration and interoperability, which requires an even closer working relationship across companies and across industries. The emergence of XML-based web services as the new computing model signals a shift away from standalone applications and networks - disconnected islands of information - to one where constellations of applications, devices and services work together. This shift in the computing model requires a change in the way we design and build technology. It's no longer enough to build standalone functionality; we also have to focus on how a particular technology works with others. While XML Web services provides the new integration methodology, we also need new ways for the industry to come together to tackle new challenges. The SDP is designed to provide an easy, flexible and reusable process for Microsoft and industry partners to collaborate. The SDP is structured on the assumption participants are motivated by business success and any cooperation has the objective of growing the industry and expanding profitable opportunities. Unlike projects developed under some open source licenses, the SDP is respectful of intellectual property and will balance goals of protecting intellectual property rights with other goals encouraging widespread adoption of the new technology developed under the SDP... The SDP is designed to let Microsoft and third parties determine how best to address a common computing problem or challenge. Broadly speaking, the SDP scope has three categories which address different models of cooperation dynamics and intellectual property models... Type 3 projects involve cooperation across the industry to enable a better technology solution for many companies and their customers. Examples of this project type might include the development of industry-wide XML schema that describe a common set of data to be shared across applications in a given industry segment. In these cases, the resulting intellectual property will be licensed broadly to the industry, and in some cases may end up getting turned over to existing standards bodies and other cross-industry organizations. Many Type 3 projects will not involve Microsoft directly, but rather a set of interested companies who will take advantage of the process tools and collaboration resources that the SDP will offer to drive a broad industry solution to a particular issue..." See also (1) the announcement: "Microsoft Announces Shared Development Process for Cooperation On Key Technology Initiatives. Company Issues Call to Industry to Join in Definition and Development of 'HailStorm' Services."; (2) "Microsoft Hailstorm."

• [June 19, 2001] "Microsoft makes a push for .Net gains." By Joe Wilcox. In Yahoo News [CNET News.com] (June 19, 2001). "Microsoft on Tuesday solidified its software-as-a-service strategy, officially naming a forthcoming high-end version of Windows and releasing new tools for software developers. During a keynote speech at the TechEd 2001 conference in Atlanta, Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates also introduced the new Shared Development Process (SDP) program, supporting the company's .Net software services strategy. If successful, the program's working groups and other features could help Microsoft establish HailStorm, the first .Net offering, as the standard for delivering services over the Internet. . . In addition, Microsoft released the final beta, or test, version of software used by developers: Visual Studio.Net, which includes Visual Basic.Net and the .Net Framework. Visual Studio.Net is expected to provide important tools to support Microsoft's drive to move its Windows operating system and software to the Web. The development package includes updated versions of Visual Basic and C++ and adds the first version of C#, a software programming language designed to facilitate the building of Web-based software... In the longer term, SDP may be the more important announcement made by Microsoft on Tuesday, according to analysts. Through the program, Microsoft plans to establish working groups and industry dialog focused on .Net services, starting with HailStorm. Through HailStorm, which uses Microsoft's Passport authentication service, the company plans to provide secure, for-fee Internet services, such as e-mail, address lists and other personal data, to virtually any type of device. The technology uses XML (Extensible Markup Language), an HTML-like programming language for creating complex data delivered over the Web. But Microsoft has been advocating proprietary schemas, or XML vocabularies, that work better with its products. Microsoft's XML dialect would favor Windows and Office -- two products, according to Dataquest, that have a market share of better than 90 percent market. Microsoft could use its dominance in the mature markets as a lever for entering other, emerging markets, Sutherland said." See: (1) "The Microsoft Shared Development Process.", and (2) the announcement: "Microsoft Announces Shared Development Process for Cooperation On Key Technology Initiatives. Company Issues Call to Industry to Join in Definition and Development of 'HailStorm' Services."

• [June 19, 2001] "BizTalk Automates B-to-B. [Review.]" By P.J. Connolly. In IT World (June 18, 2001). "Today's conventional wisdom holds that XML is the key to helping businesses work together, at least from the standpoint of merging information from disparate systems. But by itself, XML can't do anything to help. Someone has to define the extensions to the XML schema, the structure that the two partners are going to use when exchanging data. . . BizTalk Server 2000 is in some ways Microsoft's most ambitious product yet in terms of its effect on back-end operations. Most businesses that have streamlined their processes over time have done so internally with great success, but things often break down at the front door. Even the most successful EAI (enterprise application integration) or EDI (electronic data interchange) projects will have some sort of disconnect. BizTalk Server 2000 is constructed to remedy that situation by using SOAP (Simple Object Access Protocol) and XML to glue systems together electronically. It is a unique product that any business using EAI/EDI should consider. BizTalk Server is aimed at processing business documents, such as bills of lading, invoices, and purchase orders, as secured e-mail-like messages. These functions require sophisticated features such as document tracking and once-only delivery to provide the reliability needed for business-to-business transactions... The BizTalk Framework, although agnostic regarding message transport protocols, allows BizTags to carry transport-specific information. After it receives application-generated business documents, the BizTalk Server creates BizTalk messages that contain one or more BizTalk documents, which are generated either by the BizTalk Server or by the application used to create the original business document. The BizTalk Message is then sent to the partner's BizTalk Framework-compliant server which unwraps the message and passes it on to the partner's application... Three client-side tools that analysts and developers use to configure the data flow are included: BizTalk Editor, BizTalk Mapper, and BizTalk Orchestration Manager. Editor is used to create and edit XML schemas, whereas Mapper handles the XSLT (Extensible Style sheet Language Transformations) style sheets that convert data between XML schemas. Orchestration Manager, which uses Visio 2000, allows analysts to design a data flow and developers to translate that design into action. We found the BizTalk components easy to set up and use, and we were particularly impressed with BizTalk Orchestration Manager. We've used Visio before and have found it a great design tool, so we had little difficulty using it as the front end for Orchestration Manager. The GUI uses a Visio diagram split down the middle: Analysts create flowcharts on the left side, and developers, working on the right side, link the various functions from the flowchart to COM (Component Object Model) objects and message queues, also using the modified XML schemas as needed. BizTalk, with a little help from Visio's Visual Basic for Applications component, automatically applies the changes..." See "BizTalk Framework."

• [June 18, 2001] "TechEd: Microsoft touts Web services support in .NET." By Tom Sullivan. In InfoWorld (June 18, 2001). "Microsoft demonstrated Web services support across several of its enterprise servers in the opening keynote of the TechEd developer's conference here Monday. Paul Flessner, vice president of .NET servers, tried to prove that Microsoft's server software products can compete against the traditional players in the market. Dan Kusnetsky, an analyst with Framingham, Mass.-based IDC, said Microsoft's capacity to compete in the enterprise has increased, particularly where enterprises prefer to string smaller servers together than to use a single machine. . . Also in the keynote, Flessner announced the availability of Mobile Information Server 2001 and showed how it can be used to deliver Exchange information to wireless handsets. Flessner brought product managers Don Kagan and Chris Ramsey on stage to demonstrate Content Management Server, which Microsoft acquired from NCompass Labs. Flessner also showed off the next generation of SQL Server, code-named Yukon, and explained its support for XML and the Common Language Runtime..." See the announcement: "Microsoft Drives XML Web Services Integration Through .NET Enterprise Servers. Company Announces Availability of Mobile Information Server, Demonstrates Content Management Server and Takes SQL Server Past 1 Billion Dollars."

• [June 18, 2001] "Tech Giants Update E-Commerce Standard." By Stephen Shankland. From CNET News.com. June 18, 2001. "A gaggle of computing giants will release Monday a new version of a key Web standard that provides some common ground on how competitors such as Microsoft, IBM and Sun Microsystems view the future of the Internet. In September, Microsoft, IBM and Ariba proposed a standard called Universal Description, Discovery, and Integration (UDDI). The standard allows businesses to register with an Internet directory that will help companies advertise their services, so they can find one another and conduct transactions over the Web. The online yellow pages directory that UDDI provides is a key part of how 'Web services' plans such as Microsoft .Net and Sun One will work together despite corporate differences. Since last year, Sun, Hewlett-Packard, Oracle and others have joined the UDDI initiative, and the first working version of the UDDI directory was launched in May. But on Monday, the companies plan to announce the second version of the standard. The new version comes with several improvements. Among them is better support for different languages; more sophisticated searching features; the ability to describe company organizational structures such as divisions, groups and subsidiaries; and more specific business categories that companies can use to describe themselves... Registry services on the Internet are essential for Web services to succeed, and so far UDDI looks like the only option, said Gartner Group analyst Daryl Plummer. Plummber believes UDDI initially will be used in private arrangements among business partners -- for example, Home Depot could use a UDDI-based service that finds light-switch suppliers and ranks them according to pricing and availability of light switches. But UDDI faces a thorny issue: whether it will become an industry standard. Such a move would reduce the control the founding members have but could make UDDI more palatable to others by making it more neutral. UDDI organizers have said they plan to turn it over to a standards body, but that likely won't happen in the immediate future, Plummer said." See the 2001-06-18 announcement and references in "Universal Description, Discovery, and Integration (UDDI)"

• [June 18, 2001] "A Topic Map Data Model. An infoset-based proposal." By Lars Marius Garshol (Ontopia A/S) and Hans Holger Rath. TMQL [Topic Maps Query Language] Project. Reference: ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC34 N0229. June 18, 2001. "This document defines an abstract model for topic maps which makes explicit the implicit data models of ISO 13250 and XTM 1.0. It also defines a processing model for XTM 1.0 based on the data model. The model is intended to present one possible approach to specifying a data and processing model for topic maps, believed by the author to be preferrable to other proposed approaches. It is hoped that this model may represent a first step on the way to a complete model for topic maps. Such a model would serve many purposes: (1) Enable interoperability between topic map processors by defining precisely what topic map processors are required to do. (2) Enable ancillary standards to be built on the topic map standard in a precise and controlled manner. (3) Make it easier for newcomers to topic maps to understand what their abstract structure is and how they work... This document is not complete; it is an early draft intended to show a possible approach to defining the topic map model. In particular, this document has no official standing whatsoever. It is, as stated above, just a draft proposal... The abstract model for topic maps here presented is inspired by the XML Infoset, and uses a similar system of information items with named and typed properties..." See: "(XML) Topic Maps." [cache, and alternate source, from Ontopia]

• [June 18, 2001] "The Agricultural Ontology Server: A Tool for Knowledge Organisation and Integration." Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (GILW), Rome. June 2001. "At FAO, we are committed to helping combat and eradicate world hunger. Information dissemination is an important and necessary tool in furthering this cause -- we need to provide consistent, usable access to information for users in places doing this very work. And, the wide recognition of FAO as a neutral international centre of excellence for agriculture positions it perfectly to lead in the development of system specific agricultural ontologies. The Agricultural Ontology Server (AOS) will be instrumental in this effort by structuring agricultural terminology, thus making describing, defining and relating this information manageable for distributed facilities, and by standardising agricultural terminology, thus making resource access and discovery more efficient. The AOS will function as a central common reference tool for serving ontologies. Itself an ontology using the AGROVOC thesaurus as its core, it will contain and serve terms, definitions of those terms and the relationships among those terms. It is designed to serve as a focal point for the vocabulary of the agricultural domain, and to codify and standardise the knowledge within this domain. It will serve common core terms and relationships, as well as richer relationships that designate it as an ontology... The elements of the AOS will need to be encoded within the RDF framework. Common terms and definitions and their associated relationships from the core of the AOS will be identified by Universal Resource Identifiers (URIs) and stored in this common framework. (XTM is a parallel standard in development that may provide richer associations for better encoding.) To enable the second task, the AOS will use XML language to communicate among systems for the exchange of the URIs to build ontologies. The systems interested in utilising the AOS will need to use this language to be capable of interoperability. The conjunction of these standards will enable the communication of machine-readable commonly used URIs among a variety of different tools. In the case of the AOS, this type of communication will allow ontologies created by multiple tools -- their terms, definitions and relationships -- to be shared, evaluated and maintained using the central AOS.... The advent of XML (eXtensible Markup Language) provides the ability to share knowledge across different tools, using a standard schema. The RDF (Resource Description Framework) standard allows storage and sharing of metadata (data about resources) across systems. The topic mapping language, XTM (XML Topic Maps), currently in development, may provide even stronger functionality for the use of metadata. These new standards allow us to leverage controlled vocabularies in the development of common methods for describing, defining and relating resources. Briefly defined, the Agricultural Ontology Server (AOS) will function as a central common reference tool for serving ontologies. An ontology is a system that contains terms, the definitions of those terms, and the specification of relationships among those terms. It can be thought of as an enhanced thesaurus -- it provides all the basic relationships inherent in a thesaurus, plus it defines and enables the creation of more formal and more specific relationships. The AOS, using the AGROVOC thesaurus as its core, is designed to serve as a central focal point for the vocabulary of the agricultural domain, and to codify and standardise the knowledge within this domain. It enables better communication within and across systems, and structures the meaning contained within systems..." See also "Draft Specification for DC-based Application Profile for Agricultural Information."

• [June 15, 2001] "Sun Fortifies Java Development. Forte for Java 3.0 lets developers create, publish, and subscribe to XML-based Web services" By Ron Copeland. In InformationWeek Issue 841 (June 11, 2001), page 85. "If your company is a Java shop looking for tools to more easily build, assemble, and deploy enterprise applications as Web services, the latest version of Sun Microsystems' Forte for Java could help. It's one of the first development environments to offer such capabilities. Forte for Java 3.0 lets developers use Enterprise JavaBeans components not only to build enterprise applications, but also to create, publish, and subscribe to XML-based Web services. The development toolkit is available on the Web (eap.netbeans.com) as part of the Forte for Java Early Access Program. Forte for Java is a cross-platform integrated development environment for Linux, Solaris, and Windows platforms, and it's based on the NetBeans open-source development environment... One way in which the new release differs from the Forte for Java 2.0 is that it's based on the latest version of the NetBeans open-source project, which added a dozen or so modules to its code base. These modules simplify Java development and address a broad range of issues, including integration with Apache's Ant XML script tool, improved application-server support, and, perhaps most significantly, Simple Object Access Protocol-based Web-services generation and deployment. Highlights of Forte for Java 3.0 include wizards and templates for creating and packaging Enterprise JavaBeans and associated Web components. Java developers will be able to build sophisticated Web services applications rapidly, without the need for significant coding. Using an XML services registry, Java components are packaged as Web services for run-time access and execution..." See also the Sun feature article: "Forte ESP Toolkit Integrates Web Design Tools and XML Technologies."

• [June 15, 2001] "Topic Maps, NewsML and XML-Possible Integration and Implementations." By Soelwin Oo (Software Developer, Research and Development, empolis UK). 2001. See the larger collection of technical papers. "This paper will discuss how the integration of different Topic Map based technologies can lead to the development of powerful knowledge based resource retrieval systems. It will discuss in detail the possible implementation for integrating a data resource that supports Topic structures with the knowledge embodied within a Topic Map. It will discuss this using examples of technology currently being developed by empolis illustrating the possible architecture of such a system and its potential real world use. Finally, the paper will investigate the potential for further integration and scalability of the system with other Topic Map resources. More specifically, it will elaborate on the possible hurdles and pitfalls that may arise from the integration of data from multiple resources and the possible need for managing ontologies originating from different sources... NewsML is a structured flexible framework based on XML developed by the IPTC (International Press Telecommunications Council) for electronic news based publication. It supports the representation of news items and the relationships between these news items in an XML based structure. Because NewsML possesses associated metadata concerning its news content, it provides the ability for having multiple representations of the same information along with provision for handling arbitrary mixtures of media types, languages and formats. The prime interest towards NewsML within the scope of Topic Maps is that NewsML possesses metadata concerning Topics that provide the ontology of its news content. This news item ontology' puts forward an appropriate example for an opportunity to capture' concepts presented by an XML based format that supports Topic structures. Once the base ontologies used within NewsML are present within a Topic Map, an application can process NewsML documents and present to the user the instances of the base ontologies that are associated with a NewsML document. This will then present a content driven approach for navigation of a Topic Map because the user's starting point will be the base ontologies instantiated by the NewsML document..." See "NewsML and IPTC2000" and "(XML) Topic Maps."

• [June 15, 2001] "XAS: A System for Accessing Componentized, Virtual XML Documents." By Ming-Ling Lo, Shyh-Kwei Chen, Sriram Padmanabhan, and Jen-Yao Chung (IBM T. J. Watson Research Center). Paper presented at the Twenty Third International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE 2001). May 12-19, 2001. Published in the conference proceedings, pages 493-502 (with 26 references); available from the IEEE Computer Society. "XML is emerging as an important format for describing the schema of documents and data to facilitate integration of applications in a variety of industry domains. An important issue that naturally arises is the requirement to generate, store and access XML documents. It is important to reuse existing data management systems and repositories for this purpose. We describe the XML Access Server (XAS), a general purpose XML based storage and retrieval system which provides the appearance of a large set of XML documents while retaining the data in underlying federated data sources that could be relational, object-oriented, or semi-structured. XAS automatically maps the underlying data into virtual XML components when mappings between DTDs and underlying schemas are established. The components can be presented as XML documents or assembled into larger components. XAS manages the relationship between XML components and the mapping in the form of document composition logic. The versatility in its ways to generate XML documents enables XAS to serve a large number of XML components and documents efficiently and expediently."

• [June 15, 2001] "Draft requirements, examples, and a 'low bar' proposal for Topic Map Constraint Language." By Steve Pepper (Project Editor). ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC34 N226. The User Requirements include: (1) TMCL shall permit the definition of classes of topic maps in order to: [a] enable the documentation of the structure and semantics of a class of topic maps; [b] provide a foundation for defining vertical or domain specific applications of topic maps; [c] provide means of validation to ensure consistency within a topic map or across a class of topic maps; [d] enable applications to provide easier and more intuitive user interfaces for creating and maintaining topic maps; [e] enable the separation of the tasks of modeling and populating topic maps. (2) TMCL shall be based on the Topic Map Data Model (and therefore support both XTM and ISO 13250 Topic Maps). (3) TMCL shall not attempt to cover every possible constraint. Instead it should provide a solution for the most commonly required kinds of constraints and, at the same time, an extension mechanism to allow the expression of less common constraints by other means. (4) TMCL shall provide for modularization, and the ability