RE: Where are the semantics in the semantic Web?

When Tim Berners-Lee defined the semantic Web, the word "semantic" meant
"machine processable".  Now that Web services are designed for
"machine-processable", WSDL is criticized as not "semantic". The word
"semantic" in Semantic Web Services seems different from that in Semantic
Web?

If Tim Berners-Lee's definition is still effective, we can understand both
XML and RDF/OWL are machine-processible. Which way we should go? Still it's
an issue of agreement and standardization, otherwise, we have to continue
our debate. Especially according to Tim Berners-Lee's definition, WSDL is
machine-processible then why should we again add "semantics" onto such
machine-processible (thus "semantic") WSDL document? Or we are talking about
something different in the domains of SW and SWS?

-----Original Message-----
From: Joachim Peer
To: jeff@inf.ed.ac.uk
Cc: Harry Halpin; public-sws-ig@w3.org
Sent: 11/25/05 9:00 AM
Subject: Re: Where are the semantics in the semantic Web?

dear all,

i've followed this thread with great interest. i have tried to summarize
some technical (pro XML) arguments in a little paper which is attached
to this mail

kind regards!
Joachim

 <<rdfxml.pdf>>