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

RE: Relation between OWL and OWL-S

From: <jshen@it.swin.edu.au>
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 20:20:41 +1100
Message-ID: <1101201641.41a300e943158@mail.it.swin.edu.au>
To: daniela.claro@eseo.fr
Cc: public-sws-ig@w3.org

Hi, Dan,

I have no answer to your question. But from my understanding and practice, I 
think we need not worry about difference or relations between OWL and OWL-S. 
You can decide how to describe what you need, no matter using RDF, OWL or OWL-S 
or even RuleML. Esp. OWL-S and RuleML are not appearing as a mature 
recommendation, by anybody. We are not expecting every human or program or 
agent become able to understand between each other yet. The important thing is 
how to make your work done, then is how to present them. In the latter case, 
more intelligent people or agent make more complex or smarter toys or tools or 
applications or killer systems, like google (froogle, :), so that you need a 
good language to express it, including typing relations, let's say.



Quoting Daniela CLARO <daniela.claro@eseo.fr>:

> Hi all, 
>  I really need to understand this relation, and as nobody answered me, I
> supposed that they did not understand my doubt, so I will try to explain
> again:
> If I have a web service called bank, what will I use to discover this
> service? 
> -My answer: I will use the description in the profile and also the input
> and
> output parameters
> But if I have another service called bank, so how will I make the
> difference
> between them? Suppose that the first one refers to economical bank and the
> second one is a wood bank for sitting on.
> In OWL is clear that we can make this difference between the hierarchical
> view proposed, so the economical bank will be localised under economical
> tranche and wood bank will be localised under wood section like my model
> below:
> 		     ...
> 		 _____|_____
> 		|           |  
>   	  economical     wood
>             |           |
>            bank        bank
> Using that model in OWL we can make this distinction, and how can I do the
> same thing to discover a service in OWLS. 
> If I have a service called bank, how can I make this distinction? 
> Thank you very much,
> Daniela
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : public-sws-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:public-sws-ig-request@w3.org] De
> la part de Daniela CLARO
> Envoyé : lundi 15 novembre 2004 10:30
> À : public-sws-ig@w3.org
> Objet : Relation between OWL and OWL-S
> Hi all,
>  I would like to know what is actually the relation between OWL-S and OWL?
> How do I represent this relation in OWL-S? 
> I will be more clear...for example, suppose that I have a service called
> AirplaneCompany that searches for a ticket beased on some input parameters
> and it belongs to a service composition called Travel. 
> - How can I do automatic discovery in this case? I've read that the
> automatic discovery in OWL-S is based on its input and outputs parameters,
> so we can make a distinction between the services. 
> But actually, how can I say that my AirplaneCompany service is a class in
> OWL model? Where Can I put this relation in OWL-S? And also, where can I
> say
> that AirplaneCompany is the same service that AircraftCompany, as we do in
> OWL using equivalenceClass like:
> <owl:Class rdf:ID="Aircraft">
>     <owl:equivalentClass rdf:resource="urn:eg#AirPlane"/>
> These relations exist? Or in OWL-S we can not say that? 
> Thank you so much!
> Daniela
Received on Tuesday, 23 November 2004 09:21:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:54:14 UTC