- From: Reinout van Rees <reinout@vanrees.org>
- Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2003 17:30:54 +0100 (CET)
- To: public-sws-ig@w3.org
On Fri, 24 Oct 2003, Stephane Fellah wrote: > I truly believe that web services (real) interoperability can only > be reached only if web services are described semantically. Throwing bigger specifications and bigger repositories at the problem won't really help. So I agree that going the semantic web way might offer a nice alternative. > I favor a more loosy coupled architecture, based on a minimal > design, that is not based on structure and syntax (such as XML > Schema) but rather on semantic information exchange (RDF/OWL). Regarding web services themselves also a desire to be more minimal can be seen. A lot of people are advocating the "REST" style of web services (just using http for sending messages back and forth) over the SOAP style (bigger toolkits, more specifications). I think going a more minimal route regarding schemas (semantic data) combines very well with a more minimal approach regarding transport (plain http). That's a real semantic web to me. I suspect, though, that you can use rdf/owl to good effect in describing and tying together the SOAP kind, too. greetings, Reinout -- Reinout van Rees - reinout@vanrees.org http://vanrees.org/ "I bet that's a real nice ship now that the rats have left."
Received on Monday, 27 October 2003 10:30:54 UTC