W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-arch@w3.org > January 2004

Re: Web Services Architecture Document

From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@isr.umd.edu>
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 12:36:56 -0500
Message-Id: <E63BBD49-534A-11D8-8240-0003939E0B44@isr.umd.edu>
Cc: <www-ws-arch@w3.org>
To: Paul Denning <pauld@mitre.org>

On Jan 30, 2004, at 12:12 PM, Paul Denning wrote:

> At 11:45 AM 2004-01-30, Bijan Parsia wrote:
>> There are extra-W3C groups (OWL-S coalition, SWSI) who have interest 
>> in the WSA work, but they have no institutional constraints either 
>> and have some interests that are counter to using WSA as an upper 
>> arch.
>
> Please discuss these interests that are counter to using WSA as an 
> upper architecture.

For example, if you follow discussions on public-sws-ig, you'll see 
strong interest in building a framework that its more abstract that 
SOA, at least in that services, per se, aren't a particularly high 
level concept.

OWL-S is conceived as an upper ontology for services. There are people 
who favor OWL-S. They have about equal institutional status, except 
OWL-S is still being developed.

There are some people who don't favor ontology based approaches.

There are some people who favor ontology based approaches who don't 
care for upper ontology (as opposed to mapping) approaches to 
integrating ontologies.

I could imagine that the understanding of web services of some folks 
could be different (or would evolve).

I wouldn't be surprised if there were NIH issues.

Cheers,
Bijan Parsia.
Received on Friday, 30 January 2004 12:37:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:25:25 GMT