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

RE: BPEL2DAMLS developed

From: Katia Sycara <katia@cs.cmu.edu>
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2003 10:23:59 -0500
To: 'Jun Shen' <jshen@it.swin.edu.au>, www-ws@w3.org
Cc: katia@cs.cmu.edu, paolucci@cs.cmu.edu, naveen@cs.cmu.edu
Message-ID: <002801c39ef9$d86c5710$d1bd0280@scs.ad.cs.cmu.edu>

 We are doing the WSDL2OWL-S tool at CMU.
 Thanks, Katia

-----Original Message-----
From: www-ws-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Jun
Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2003 1:02 AM
To: www-ws@w3.org
Subject: FW: BPEL2DAMLS developed

-----Original Message-----
From: Jun Shen [mailto:jshen@it.swin.edu.au] 
Sent: Thursday, 30 October 2003 3:49 PM
To: 'Sheila McIlraith'
Subject: RE: BPEL2DAMLS developed

Dear Sheila,

That's exactly concerns we're perplexed about. 

First we definitely use Process Model.

Second, we have kept watching the progress of all involved languages, our
current version is supporting BPEL, WSDL(with extensions for BPEL) and
DAML-S by July 2003. When we were developing, we argued about instance or
class level mapping for processes/activities. Unfortunately, we understood
DAML-S 0.9 as treating them as classes (CongoProcess example). This sounds
suitable for ontological descriptions of abstract service flows. But when we
treat them as executable (BPEL's double facet) and when we also want to
convert XPDL to DAML-S (work in progress), instance representations of
processes become reasonable.

The above conflict is also reflected in the results, i.e., when we use
Protege and import 'process.daml' or 'loanApproval.daml' created by our
tool, there is no traceable meta ontology  and instances (individuals) for
all these classes(processes). Maybe a solution is there, and we hope our
next version be fully shifted to OWL, which is gaining wider interest and
support, provided it becomes reasonably stable. 

I guess somebody else is trying WSDL2OWL-S or further. 

Thanks for your up-to-date information.



-----Original Message-----
From: www-ws-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of
Sheila McIlraith
Sent: Thursday, 30 October 2003 3:03 PM
To: www-ws@w3.org
Subject: Re: BPEL2DAMLS developed

Hi Jun,

Your tool sounds very interesting.  I'd like to know a little more about
what sorts of DAML-S based ontologies you generate from the BPEL spec.
E.g., are you generating a DAML-S profile or a DAML-S process model, or
both?  The most appropriate ontology to generate would be a process model.

Note that there is a new release of DAML-S in which processes in the process
model are treated as instances rather than classes.  Also note that DAML-S
was a DAML+OIL ontology.  The DAML Services Coalition has transitioned to
using OWL rather than DAML+OIL.  As such DAML-S is now OWL-S, an OWL
ontology for Web services.

Sheila McIlraith

> Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2003 10:16:10 +1100
> From: Jun Shen <jshen@it.swin.edu.au>
> To: www-ws@w3.org
> Subject: BPEL2DAMLS developed
> Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2003 18:17:07 -0500 (EST)
> Resent-From: www-ws@w3.org
> Dear all
> This tool generates ontologies based on DAML-S from specific BPEL4WS
> workflow specifications. It extended CMU's WSDL2DAMLS by validating 
> BPEL and WSDL files and the output can be imported into Protege-2000 
> (as well as Protégé b2.0). The current version serves the newest 
> versions of related languages.
> Open source is currently ready for inquiry (email: jshen@computer.org)
> and will be released for testing on 
> http://www.it.swin.edu.au/centres/cicec/
> soon.
> You're more than welcome to have a try and provide feedback and bug
> fixes.
> Cheers
> Centre for Internet Computing and E-Commerce
> School of Information Technology
> Swinburne Univ of Tech
> Melbourne, Australia

Sheila McIlraith, PhD                 Phone: 650-723-7932
Senior Research Scientist             Fax:  650-725-5850
Knowledge Systems Lab
Department of Computer Science
Gates Sciences Building, 2A-248       http://www.ksl.stanford.edu/people/sam
Stanford University                   E-mail:
Stanford, CA 94305-9020
Received on Thursday, 30 October 2003 10:26:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:37:10 UTC