Browser Ontology - terminology and term relations

A standard set of terms and relations for browser technology. Does this already exist? Device independent capability terms and concerns. Systems engineering, software engineering, systems of systems SoS, internet of things IoT, digital twin, human digital twin, …

There are many standards that provide the underlying technology specifications but is there an existing standard / specification for a standard set of terms for browser capability.

To consider. The line between app and browser seems somewhat arbitrary. App arguably a sub set of browser. Both app and browser are client side applications. So a browser ontology standard might also contain as parallel working group app ontology standard as a sub set of the browser ontology. Would it be the same all inclusive standard or might a separate app standard be required. Might it be an issue of device specific language which appears somewhat distinct but in reality are more similar than not. What is the overlap and delta if any. Set theoretically to what extent are app and browser the same.

See discussion here

Also here

Also here

Also here

Also here

The working group might consider structuring the 'browser/app ontology in a similar fashion to the REA ontology. That is using a structured approach to encapsulate related sets of stakeholder concerns as views. Mapping model elements in one viewpoint to model elements in other viewpoints.

Candidate views might include, similar to REA, a temporal view to include policy (enterprise) compliance (enterprise) regulation (gov) oversight (gov) directive legal and so on . Another view might be a safeguarding view including risk (person, enterprise) privacy (personal digital twin) caring (parent, child, …, ) . Another might be an epistemic view including authority controls (see Wikipedia) education (primary, secondary, tertiary, ) empirical evidence () fake news (see UN initiatives) misinformation/disinformation and so on. The epistemic view is necessarily related to both the temporal view and safeguarding view. Maybe, also similar to REA, a workflow view including use cases like work (BMM) economic exchange (person, enterprise, BIAN, FIBO, REA, …) entertainment (television, film, news, social media, ) adult services (dating, gambling, porn, ) illicit/criminal (drugs, fencing or art & antiquities , … ). The workflow view necessarily related to the temporal view and safeguarding view and to the epistemic view in some cases. Possibly other views.

Consider using meta architecture standard ISO 42010 and tailoring architecture realisation UAF as necessary to aid in structuring ontology. Consider use of ISO 42020 and ISO 42030. And relation to ISO 402xx and ISO 405xx .

To enable user control
To enable safeguards for human digital engagement
To enable better browser technology
To provide standard terms for browser capability and use
To reduce vendor browser lock in
To enable standard device independent capability
To enable discussion debate with a vendor neutral language
To enable gap analysis with vendor products
To enable strategic analysis (OSGM, PEST, SWOT, … )
To enable standard language for regulatory purposes
To enable standard language for oversight purposes
To enable standard language for policy purposes
To enable standard language for compliance purposes
To enable standard language for risk purposes
To enable standard language for legal purposes


Thought Leaders
Tim Berners Lee
William McCarthy

BIAN, Banking Industry Architecture Network,
IETF, Internet Engineering Task Force,
OMG, Object Management Group,
WPF, World Privacy Forum,
W3C, World Wide Web Consortium,

BIAN Artefacts, BIAN, <inclusive inter alia; services landscape, data types, classes, … , >
BMM, Business Motivation Model, OMG,
FIBO, Financial Industry Business Ontology, OMG <also related omg financial working group standards, >
REA, Resource Event Actor, <economic exchange, accounting, >
Web Services Architecture, W3C,

Systems and software engineering — Architecture description