- From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@isr.umd.edu>
- Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2006 10:51:22 +0100
- To: "Xuan Shi" <Xuan.Shi@mail.wvu.edu>
- Cc: <jpsequeira@netvisao.pt>, <public-sws-ig@w3.org>
On Jul 23, 2006, at 7:29 PM, Xuan Shi wrote: > OWL-S is a mixture of *service-related* issues. As Bijan said, if you > are a service provider, normally "there won't be a lot of process to > describe". This means, once a service provider describes IOPEs for the > service, that's enough (service.owl, profile.owl). Well, that's not what I said, and that's not what I meant, and you used selective quotation to achieve this misrepresentation. In <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sws-ig/2006Jul/ 0019.html>, I wrote: """(There's no requirement for separate files. ******IF YOUR SERVICE IS ATOMIC******, there won't be a lot of process to describe).""" [emphasis added] "If you are a service provider" is in no way a paraphrase of "if your service is atomic". And it certainly doesn't mean that describing a services IOPEs for a process "is enough". I clearly was pointing out that a "process.owl" for an atomic process might be quite small, with the clear implication trat the profile might be quite bulky. I expect a retraction of your culpable, yet stupid as you included them below, misrepresentation of my words. As to the rest of your nonsense, I have no other comment but to note that it is both nonsense and completely unresponsive to the original poster. Cheers, Bijan.
Received on Monday, 24 July 2006 10:00:09 UTC