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: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 22:41:31 -0800
Message-ID: <3FE3EF1B.8050501@ai.sri.com>
To: Austin Tate <a.tate@ed.ac.uk>
Cc: public-sws-ig@w3.org



Austin Tate wrote:

> At 22:17 17/12/2003 -0800, David Martin wrote:
> 
>> 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".
> 
> 
> 
> I agree, its very similar... but there is a point to having ONE language 
> independent conceptual underpinning... that of a set of activities that 
> are constrained in arbitrary and extendible ways... it can be seen as 
> providing a description of the space of legitimate behaviours without 
> having a separate interpretation for each attribute of an object in a 
> specific language.  But we can certainly then map "common" constraints 
> and properties onto predefined attributes to get back all of what we 
> want from OWL-S, etc.

OK, sure.  I have a followup question (and forgive me if you've already 
answered this in other conversations) -

Are you advocating a *formalized* language independent conceptual 
underpinning, or just an informal set of terminology for common 
reference in natural language uses?  Well, no doubt a formal approach is 
desireable - but is it an essential part of what you are advocating?

Cheers,
David
Received on Saturday, 20 December 2003 01:46:05 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 16 March 2008 00:10:53 GMT