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

Ambiguity of words in HCI for web servies

From: Adrian Walker <adrianw@snet.net>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 15:49:26 -0500
Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.2.20041124152847.02f49d90@pop.snet.net>
To: Drew McDermott <drew.mcdermott@yale.edu>
Cc: public-sws-ig@w3.org, charlie@semantech.org, daniela.claro@eseo.fr

Drew, Daniela, Charlie --

[Drew wrote, below]

>Q2: How does one deal with the ambiguity of words in HCI for web
>services?  Good question, also asked by Charlie Abela.

[Adrian suggests]

One way of tackling Q2, is to be able to generate examples, in English, 
of  the processing steps that the service would actually do, given the 
input words.

For example, in the Internet Business Logic system**, you give input and 
get output in a form of open vocabulary English.  In case you suspect 
ambiguity in the English input or output, you can get a step-by-step, top 
down English explanation of the processing that the system actually did.

One could think of this as Semantics++    (:-)

                                           -- Adrian



                                        INTERNET BUSINESS LOGIC (R)

                                          ** www.reengineeringllc.com

Dr. Adrian Walker
Reengineering LLC
PO Box 1412
Bristol
CT 06011-1412 USA

Phone: USA 860 583 9677
Cell:    USA  860 830 2085
Fax:    USA  860 314 1029



At 02:24 PM 11/24/2004 +0000, you wrote:


> > [Daniela CLARO]
> >
> > 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 
> differe> nce
> > between them? Suppose that the first one refers to economical bank and 
> th> e
> > 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 
> th> e
> > same thing to discover a service in OWLS.
> >
> > If I have a service called bank, how can I make this distinction?
>
>It's hard to answer your question, because it mushes together several
>distinct questions.  Let me try to separate them --
>
>Q1: How does one avoid the ambiguity between different senses of the
>word "bank" in the innards of ontologies?  The answer would be
>namespaces.  (By the way, the banks you sit on are only banks in
>Italian; in English they are "benches," which comes from the Italian,
>but conveniently changed spelling, thus eliminating the confusion.  To
>compensate, the earthen walls of rivers are called "banks," so if we
>have a web service selling tours of river margins, the confusion is
>restored.)
>
>Q2: How does one deal with the ambiguity of words in HCI for web
>services?  Good question, also asked by Charlie Abela.
>
>Q3: Must we do without Owl mechanisms such as inheritance when we use
>Owl-S?  The answer is No!  Owl-S is an _application_ of Owl, and
>doesn't replace a hair on its pointy little head.
>
>Q4: Is there a problem with multiple inheritance if an agent is both
>a service _and_ an "economical entity"?  I don't know, but I don't see
>why there would be a problem.
>
>Does any of these alternative questions come close to what you
>intended?
>
>--
>
>                                          -- Drew McDermott
>                                             Yale University
>                                             Computer Science Department
Received on Wednesday, 24 November 2004 20:49:51 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 16 March 2008 00:10:58 GMT