W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws@w3.org > August 2003

Re: DAML-S and ebXML Registry

From: Farrukh Najmi <farrukh.najmi@sun.com>
Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2003 17:48:22 -0400
Message-ID: <3F2AE026.3040508@sun.com>
To: Jeff Lansing <jeff@polexis.com>
CC: "Terry R. Payne" <trp@ecs.soton.ac.uk>, www-ws@w3c.org, "regrep@lists.oasis-open.org" <regrep@lists.oasis-open.org>

Jeff Lansing wrote:

>
> Farrukh Najmi wrote:
>
>> The plans include direct support for RDF, OWL, DAML-S within the 
>> Registry Information Model (RIM).
>
>
> What does "direct support" mean here?
>
> Isn't the overall idea that DAML-S provides a service capabilities 
> information model (SIM), and the RIM provides a storage model (but we 
> have just seen that that's just one storage model, UDDI + the earlier 
> mentioned mapping provide another) in which to represent the SIM?
>
> So will the direct support just make this representation easier, or 
> will it somehow "shortcut" across the layers in this layered model idea? 

<Please note that none of these details have been defined in the current 
version (2.5) of the specifications./>

By direct support I meant evolution of RIM to layer on top of RDF and 
OWL allowing RIM defined metadata to be more extensible and semantically 
expressive. RIM ClassificationSchemes could evolve into OWL ontologies 
which could be used for classifying objects.

As for DAML-S, as you correctly observed, a mapping of DAML-S to ebXML 
Registry can be easily done based upon current version of the specs and 
could be added as a Technical Note.

However, with the "direct support" of RDF and OWL the mapping could take 
closer advanatage of the new RDF enabled type/attribute extensibility 
and OWL based ontology/classification support in RIM.

-- 
Farrukh
Received on Friday, 1 August 2003 17:51:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:25:43 GMT