1. OKABE, Masao 1 2009/8/21 Relations between MFI Registry and Repositories outside of MFI 1 First, registration and authorization Second, periodical crawling ・ For detailed information, a MFI registry accesses repositories that stores complete models. repositories that stores complete models 1 ＭＯＦ M3 M2 M1 Not necessarily prescribed by MOF. (e.g. OWL Abstract Syntax is oK But, in Part2, it is advisable that the models here are prescribed by MOF eg. Application (instance) models of MFI-5 e.g Application (instance) models of IDEF0, SSADM, RMODP etc. MFI Part1 Part2 &4Part3Part5Part7Part8 Part 9 ROR ?

2. OKABE, Masao 2 MFI Part6 Registration procedure The difference from MDR Part6 Under the assumption that complete models (ontologies, process modeles, service modes etc.) exist outside of MFI, MFI only registers a common parts of models with its administered items. So, it is a key issue of MFI Part6 that the synchronization of a complete model and its common parts in a MFI registry. This issue is particular to MFI Part6 and may be out of the scope of MDR Part6.

3. OKABE, Masao 3 Points to be discussed (1 of 2) Initial submission Before synchronization, the initial submission (and its authorization) is necessary. The procedure of the initial submission might be almost the same as MDR Part6. But, some new issues exist. For example, MFI Part 3 distinguishes a reference ontology and a local ontology. So, when some organization wants to register some ontology in a MFI registry as a reference ontology as its initial submission, what is a condition of a necessary procedure?  Explicit conditions are better?  such as: An ontology which is already ISO standard (e.g. ISO 18629 PSL etc.) can be automotically a reference ontology.  Or a procedural requirement is better?  such as:  To be registered as a reference ontology, it needs the authorization of XXXX.

4. OKABE, Masao 4 Points to be discussed (2 of 3) Synchronization There are two ways. 1.Periodical crawling by MFI  After initial submission is authorized, a MFI registry periodically crawls to the repositories that store complete models. 2.Update submission by the owners(initial submitter)  Something like “When a complete model is updated, its update has to be submitted to a MFI registry by the owner within 1 week” For a well-authorized and frequently updated complete modeles such as Gene ontology, 1. is better. But, there may be the cases that 2. is better. Should MFI Part6 allow both?

5. OKABE, Masao 5 Points to be discussed (3 of 3) Other issues Procedure for the information that cannot be gained even from a complete model?  Unfortunately, there are some.  Example –Registration authority –authoritative-extent of MFI Part3 Ed2 –non-functional properties of MFI Part7 ? Change notification service  To promote the registration to a MFI registry, it should provide some services to submitters (owners).  Change notification service is a minimal one.  Should it be included in MFI Part6?

6. OKABE, Masao 6 Future Work Based on the discussion today, I will prepare a material for the London interim meeting in November. Prepare CD expectedly by 2010-02-0, as stated at Resolution WG 2 / 7, in 32N1880-WG2-Resolutions- JeJuDraft-r5.