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

Re: OWL-S in use?

From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@isr.umd.edu>
Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 21:55:41 -0400
Message-Id: <A947B49E-1671-11D9-9B73-000D93C1F7A6@isr.umd.edu>
Cc: public-sws-ig@w3.org
To: Robert Mark Bram <relaxedrob@optusnet.com.au>

On Oct 4, 2004, at 9:43 PM, Robert Mark Bram wrote:

> Hi Bijan,
>>> Are there any examples of OWL-S in currently in use? I have found a 
>>> few OWL ontologies on SchemaWeb, and was hoping that some people 
>>> have started using them..
>>> http://www.schemaweb.info/schema/BrowseSchema.aspx
>> Do you mean OWL-S or OWL?
> Definitely OWL-S - I found a few instances of OWL in SchemaWeb, but no 
> examples of OWL-S.
>>> Also, are there any tools for OWL-S developed yet? I saw some for 
>>> DAML+OIL on Dave Beckett's resource list:
>>> http://www.ilrt.bristol.ac.uk/discovery/rdf/resources/
>> This seems like OWL.
>> Both OWL-S and OWL are in use. One example of OWL is exactly OWL-S!
> I should have said that I was after tools to help build an OWL-S 
> description of a service. :)

If you want to do it programmatically:

(More toys, including validators, etc.: 

We had a "composer" tool which got a bit bitrotted. Work is 
recommencing on that.

We will also have some sort of specific browsing/editing support in:

>> OWL-S is being used by, e.g., Fujistu (for their Task Computing 
>> project http://taskcomputing.org/).
> Thank you very much - I am looking at this one now..


Bijan Parsia.
Received on Tuesday, 5 October 2004 01:55:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:54:13 UTC