W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-sws-ig@w3.org > January 2006

RE: Internet/Distributed Computing using HTTP/POST: Bridge semant ic W eb and Web services under the same Internet protocol

From: Shi, Xuan <xshi@GEO.WVU.edu>
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 10:05:50 -0500
Message-ID: <D81F456794C18B4DA3E2ABC47DBBEEF2094F1A@www.geo.wvu.edu>
To: "'Drew McDermott '" <drew.mcdermott@yale.edu>, "'public-sws-ig@w3.org> '" <public-sws-ig@w3.org>
Cc: "Shi, Xuan" <xshi@GEO.WVU.edu>

Dear Dr. McDermott:

Thank you very much for your advice. Just as you said, "But what it can
_express_ (and hence "address") is neutral on the issue of how many services
a process is to interact with." if I am a service requester, send a request
to a service provider (something like www.expedia.com), why do I need to
concern about how many services the provider will interact with? A service
requester is waiting for an answer, but does not care about the process.
Thus OWL-S's expression is meaningless but a burden to service requester. 

That's why and what I suggested that OWL-S remove the process model from its
framework. Actually since WSDL is not a must for Web servcies, then its
grounding part is also not a necessary part for semantic Web services. Then
what remains? Service Profile! That may be enough. If a service provider can
explicitly tell the requester what the service can provide and how to invoke
the service (IOPEs + protocol + interface, etc.), then requester can
understand how to compose a request and consume the service. When we wait
for an answer from www.expedia.com, we do NOT know and care about the
process to get the answer.

Xuan

-----Original Message-----
From: Drew McDermott
To: public-sws-ig@w3.org>
Sent: 1/25/06 8:50 AM
Subject: RE: Internet/Distributed Computing using HTTP/POST: Bridge semantic
Web and Web services under the same Internet protocol



> [Battle, Steven Andrew]
> [...]
> OWL-S cannot compose services, only processes that
> ultimately break down into atomic processes that correspond to WSDL
> operations. In other words, OWL-S only addresses compositions of
actions
> that can be performed at a _single_ service interface. It can't
> describe, for example, how you can buy a book on Amazon then sell it
on
> eBay because these are two different services. 

Owl-S cannot compose anything, because it's an ontology and notation
for expressing information about services.  But what it can _express_
(and hence "address") is neutral on the issue of how many services a
process is to interact with.  If you have a program that can generate
multi-service compositions, Owl-S can express them.

-- 

                                         -- Drew McDermott
                                            Yale University
                                            Computer Science Department
Received on Wednesday, 25 January 2006 15:06:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:54:16 UTC