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

Re: Planning under Description Logic ?--an obstacle towards WSAC

From: Manshan Lin <lmshill@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 08:48:48 +0800
Message-ID: <ced14a840412021648634a7385@mail.gmail.com>
To: public-sws-ig@w3.org
Cc: jzimmer@inf.ed.ac.uk

> I've experimented with the (rather old) PRODIGY planner  for SWS
> composition and supposedly it allows to
> add axioms like this to planning domain descriptions. Manual at:
> http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs.cmu.edu/project/prodigy/version4.0/pub/manual.ps.gz
> So your example would probably along the lines of
> 
> (Inference-Rule intersectionClass
> (params <x>)
> (preconds
>  ((<x> Effect))
>  (and (type <x> EffectB)
>          (type <x> EffectC)))
> (effects
>  ()
>  ((add (type <x> EffectA)))))
> 
> Basically, inference-rules are like operators except that they don't
> occur in the final plan.

Yes, I agree. Maybe we should consider it as a dummy operatation,
which takes no time to execute, in planning. Of course, comparing with
normal operations, the dummy operation doesn't cause world state
transformation.

> However, I havn't really worked with this feature so far...
> One problem is that Prodigy's type system only allows single inheritance. :( 
> Personally, I think that planning is not really the right approach to
> SWS composition.

Why? Just because it is hard to achieve and seems unpractical?
Do you think manual process modeling with dynamic binding of concrete
WS is more preferable?
Since the userss tastes and requirements can't be the same, it's hard
to construct a silver
process that fits for any situation.
Constructing a composite WS on the fly based on specific goal, isn't that cool?

> 
> You find many alternative approaches on
>   http://staff.um.edu.mt/cabe2/research/projects/swsc/planning.htm
> Situation calculus seems appealing but, of course, there is no usable
> implementation
> and I don't know much about automation of it...

Situation calculus is suitable to express the operation in OWL-S.
But it only considers functional aspects.
I think that current planning researches in SWSC place too much effort
on how to generate a plan
to meet functional requirements and ignore non-functional ones.

Best regards!

Manshan Lin
Email: lmshill@hotmail.com;lmshill@gmail.com
Affiliation: School of Computer Science and Engineering, the South
China University of Technology
Phone: (+86)13711287277
2004-12-03
Received on Friday, 3 December 2004 00:49:20 GMT

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