(unknown charset) Re: Question on OWL-S 1.0 Profile

On Sat, 10 Jan 2004, David Martin wrote:

>
>
> Mithun Sheshagiri wrote:
>
> >
> > Hello all,
> >                            I agree with Alexandre. Now for the directory
> > to be any use, both the profile and the process have to be provided.
>
> That's not really true.
>
> In the first place, OWL-S 1.0 does not state that a profile must refer
> to the IOPE definitions in the process model.  That is left open.  So
> yes, it is possible for the profile to refer to the IOPE definitions in
> the process model - and I view that as the most normal approach.  But it
> is also possible for the profile to include its own IOPE definitions,
> which would normally be copies of what are in the process model, or a
> subset of them.

You are right. I mistakenly made the conclusion based on the two examples
of profile. Both these files have pointers to definition of IOPEs in the
process model.


>
> Just because Parameter and its subclasses (Input, Output, etc.) are
> defined in Process.owl, does not mean that instances of these classes
> must appear in process models.  That's part of the flexibility of OWL.
>
> Even if the profile refers to the same IOPE definitions as the process
> model,  I don't think that means that the entire process model has to be
> made available along with the profile.  For example, one simple solution
> would be to put all the IOPE definitions in a separate file, and have
> both the profile and the process model refer to the definitions in that
> file.  (As to whether those definitions should be in the same or in a
> different namespace than the process model, I'm not sure at the moment.)
>
> Regards,
> David Martin
>
> > If
> > this is the case, the profile and the process could be merged.
> >
> > Also, the 1.0 release white paper says-
> >
> > "....Furthermore, the Profile implicitly specifies the intended purpose
> > of the service: it advertises those functionalities that the service
> > wants to provide, while it may hide (not declare publicly) other
> > functionalities..."
> >
> > This might have been true for the earlier release as the profile had its
> > own parameter descriptions (assuming that there might be a mechanism
> > that first makes sure that the requester is a genuine and then provides
> > the processModel file). In the new release, since the parameter
> > descriptions are pointers to the process, the requester has access to
> > the process model and therefore nothing would prevent the requester from
> > accessing the hidden parameters/functionalities.
> >
> >
> > regards,
> > mithun
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Alexandre Lins wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I have a question about the new OWL-S 1.0 specification and I thought
> >> perhaps someone in the list could help me with this.
> >>
> >> Looking through the specification for the profile I noticed that the
> >> parameter descriptions (IOPEs) were modified and became simple
> >> pointers to definitions in the process model file.
> >>
> >> This new arrangement is more compact and clear, but from the point of
> >> view of service discovery and matchmaking, does not it means that now
> >> I need to send a profile and a process model to perform matching?
> >>
> >> In the last version of the specification the names and types of the
> >> parameters (IOPEs) were described in the profile itself, and to
> >> perform matchmaking I could simply send a profile description to a
> >> matchmaking engine, right?
> >>
> >> Now there is no such information on the profile anymore, and so I
> >> would need to send both descriptions (profile and process model) to
> >> the matchmaker. Either this, or not sending any information regarding
> >> IOPEs for the matchmaker, in which case the match would be done based
> >> only on service parameters and categories, and other information.
> >>
> >> I just wanted to know if really got it right, or if I missed
> >> something. Or perhaps there is some other solution to this. Can
> >> someone help me with this?
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> Alexandre Lins.
> >>
> >>
> >> __________________________________________________________________________
> >>
> >> Acabe com aquelas janelinhas que pulam na sua tela.
> >> AntiPop-up UOL - É grátis!
> >> http://antipopup.uol.com.br/
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>

Received on Sunday, 11 January 2004 14:33:59 UTC