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

RE: today's minutes

From: Terry R. Payne <trp@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Date: Sun, 12 Oct 2003 19:05:30 +0100
To: "'Bijan Parsia'" <bparsia@isr.umd.edu>
Cc: "'Semantic Web Services Language Committee'" <swsl-committee@daml.org>, <www-ws@w3.org>
Message-ID: <065301c390eb$6c5770d0$3e404e98@ecs.soton.ac.uk>


Bijan,

> > Minor comment (for discussion perhaps?)
> 
> [snip]
> 
> It is for discussion, and we should take this discussion to www-ws as
> per our policty and because there are folks there who think
differently
> (I think) that we have been used to.

Oh yeah - sorry, wrong list.  Ok, to www-ws it goes...

> > What I'm curious is, other than a broadening acceptance and
> > understanding of wide-area service integration, and perhaps a bunch
of
> > useful standards (e.g. WSDL), what are Web Service technologies
> > actually
> > giving us?
> 
> What of *Web* technologies themselves?

Useful, most definitely, but I firmly believe we should accommodate the
developments in WS standards, but not be constrained by them.  For
example, I recently had a discussion with someone who had made the
assumption that all messages between WSDL clients would be strongly
typed, and formatted in XML (which isn't always the case - consider http
bindings, for instance). 
 
> (And it might be that the Web or Web Services constrain us in ways
that
> something like CORBA might not. One decision is whether to overcome
> those constrains (e.g., by building up another layer) or to work
within
> them because we think it gets us something.)

We should harness what WS give us, but... well I'm about to repeat what
I said above.  Also, I'm seriously concerned that we could risk
re-inventing the wheel, by ignoring work in other service-anaolgous
research fields (e.g. DAI, Grid, Multi-Agents etc).

> I meant to add that it's totally unclear to me that the "web
influence"
> on semantic web services is limited, in any way, to matchmaking. Most
> particularly, I think it affects composition in a lot of ways (or
> could) and thus process modeling. See:
> 	http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws/2003Oct/0024.html
> (which I don't understand) as at least one assertion that there's a
> special WebLike way of doing composition.

Terry

_______________________________________________________________________
Terry R. Payne, PhD.      | http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~trp/index.html
University of Southampton | Voice: +44(0)23 8059 8343 [Fax: 8059 2865]
Southampton, SO17 1BJ, UK | Email: terry@acm.org / trp@ecs.soton.ac.uk




> 
> > What I'm curious is, other than a broadening acceptance and
> > understanding of wide-area service integration, and perhaps a bunch
of
> > useful standards (e.g. WSDL), what are Web Service technologies
> > actually
> > giving us?
> 
> What of *Web* technologies themselves?
> 
> This is exactly what I think we need to address head on. I'll happily
> start a thread on this topic on www-ws, but I think that having a
> specific session on this issue at the F2F would be valuable as well.
> 
> (And it might be that the Web or Web Services constrain us in ways
that
> something like CORBA might not. One decision is whether to overcome
> those constrains (e.g., by building up another layer) or to work
within
> them because we think it gets us something.)
> 
> I meant to add that it's totally unclear to me that the "web
influence"
> on semantic web services is limited, in any way, to matchmaking. Most
> particularly, I think it affects composition in a lot of ways (or
> could) and thus process modeling. See:
> 	http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws/2003Oct/0024.html
> (which I don't understand) as at least one assertion that there's a
> special WebLike way of doing composition.
> 
> I think its well within our mandate to study such possibilties.
Indeed,
> it may be required of us.
> 
> Cheers,
> Bijan.
Received on Sunday, 12 October 2003 14:06:08 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:25:44 GMT