W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-sws-ig@w3.org > December 2003

Re: [OWL-S] Who does what?

From: David Martin <martin@ai.sri.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2003 22:17:25 -0800
Message-ID: <3FE14675.6060202@ai.sri.com>
To: Austin Tate <a.tate@ed.ac.uk>
Cc: public-sws-ig@w3.org

Hello Austin -

Austin Tate wrote:

> At 21:46 16/12/2003 -0800, David Martin wrote:
>> (1) Make "who does what" more explicit in OWL-S process models, by 
>> relying on "participant", and adding additional, related, constructs 
>> as needed to spell it out.
> Using a general and extendible constraint formulation we can have 
> "perform activity actor" constraints (see NIST PSL and PIF) rather than 
> having to add lots of specialised attributes.
> I am still arguing for a simple underlying structure that just express a 
> process model as a set of activities and a set of suitable constraints, 
> and a set of annotations of form key=value.

Yes, I understand and am sympathetic to this general approach.

But I don't think it's really any different than what I had in mind when 
I wrote (1) above.  After all, an OWL property instance with a value can 
be thought of as a key=value pair, and OWL certainly provides a general, 
extendable framework.  Further, I am certainly not advocating "lots" of 
attributes; just the minimum number needed to get the job done. 
Finally, I don't see that "perform activity actor" is any less 
"specialized" than the OWL-S "participant" property, or any other 
property we may find that we need to clarify "who does what".

Received on Thursday, 18 December 2003 01:23:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:54:11 UTC