W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-sws-ig@w3.org > December 2004

Re: [ann] CODE (CMU OWL-S Development Environment) - Beta release available

From: Massimo Paolucci <paolucci@cs.cmu.edu>
Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 11:53:24 -0500
Message-ID: <41AF4884.1030004@cs.cmu.edu>
To: Paul Libbrecht <paul@activemath.org>
CC: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@isr.umd.edu>, public-sws-ig@w3.org, Naveen Srinivasan <naveen@cs.cmu.edu>

Paul,

The OWL-S IDE gives the developer a starting point, but the developer 
should be aware of the assumptions that are made by the translation 
system, and that were listed very well by Bijan.   Anyway, once the 
translation is completed, the developer will have access to the OWL-S 
editor and she will be able to modify the code produced as she prefers 
(we are currently working on an editor for the grounding, and editors 
for WSDL are already available).  If information is lost, or if bugs are 
introduced, the developer will have a chance to fix the problem with the 
editor.

On a more scientific/technological point of view,  there should be a 
connection between the OWL-S description and the Java code,  and ideally 
you would like to derive the complete OWL-S description from Java.  The 
problem is that this transformation requires many decisions and 
abstractions (Which java functions to model?  how to abstract java 
classes to owl classes? how to model data/control flow? etc) that makes 
it very difficult to automate.  The CMU tool is a first step,  but the 
arena is open for everybody to contribute.

--- Massimo


Paul Libbrecht wrote:

>
>
> Le 2 déc. 04, à 16:34, Bijan Parsia a écrit :
>
>>> I am all but an expert but isn't this somewhat simplistic to use all 
>>> these translations transparently ?
>>
>> Usually, there is some sort of augmentation or alteration done at 
>> each level. Well, java2wsdl is usually transparent *except* in so far 
>> as you might want to specify alternative bindings (which is 
>> significant!). When going form WSDL2OWL-S, you *at least* want to add 
>> to the profile something about the type, constraints, and capabilties 
>> of the service. So you've added informaton! Actually, it's similar to 
>> what you might add when creating a UDDI entry.
>
>
> But isn't augmentation and alteration at each level, precisely against 
> the goals of this development environment ?
>
> paul
>
>
>
>
Received on Thursday, 2 December 2004 16:53:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 16 March 2008 00:10:59 GMT