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

Re: possible mistakes in the OWL-S document?

From: David Martin <martin@AI.SRI.COM>
Date: Sun, 28 Mar 2004 21:32:42 -0800
Message-ID: <4067B4FA.50603@ai.sri.com>
To: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@isr.umd.edu>
Cc: Sebastian Brandt <sbrandt@i5.informatik.rwth-aachen.de>, OWL-S Mailing List <public-sws-ig@w3.org>

Thanks, Sebastian, and Bijan.  I've just made these corrections in our 
source, and in the published HTML of the Tech. Overview.  The PDF and PS 
forms will have to be updated later.

Regards,
David

Bijan Parsia wrote:

> 
> On Mar 26, 2004, at 10:32 AM, Sebastian Brandt wrote:
> 
>>
>> Dear OWL-S developers,
>> reading the OWL-S document, I found a few places, where a wording 
>> appearently did not reflect the semantics, as I had understood them 
>> from the text.
>>
>> 5.1.1 Process
>> * Preconditions and Effects
>> [...]
>> The _output_ describes the actual event: that the amount of money in 
>> the credit card account has been reduced.
>> [...]
>> In my opinion, this is just the difference between output and effect - 
>> the output is some information like the invoice, yet the reduction 
>> itself is the _effect_.
> 
> 
> Yes, looks like a typo.
> 
>>
>> 5.4 Composite Process
>> Unordered
>> [...]
>> X = (Sequence a b)
>> Y = (Sequence c d)
>> Z = (Unordered _A_ _B_)
>> [...]
>> The example only makes sense, as far as I can see, if
>> Z = (Unordered X Y)
> 
> 
> Yep, nother typo.
> 
>> I hope you can find out whether I misunderstood, or your draft is 
>> incorrect in this matters.
> 
> 
> Nope. Good catches both.
> 
> Cheers,
> Bijan Parsia.
> 
Received on Monday, 29 March 2004 00:33:57 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 16 March 2008 00:10:55 GMT