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: Luke Steller <Luke.Steller@infotech.monash.edu.au>
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 22:28:05 +1100
Message-ID: <761d7eaa0601300328o6f74a46bi2c29f0c13bb0028d@mail.gmail.com>
To: "public-sws-ig@w3.org> " <public-sws-ig@w3.org>, "Shi, Xuan" <xshi@geo.wvu.edu>

On 1/26/06, Shi, Xuan <xshi@geo.wvu.edu> wrote:
> 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?

but its not the provider who is interacting with the services, its the
client - hence the client needs to know.


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 Monday, 30 January 2006 11:28:10 UTC

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