W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-sws-ig@w3.org > September 2004

Re: Executing OWL-S/Profile - a comparison of existing mechanisms

From: Pranam Kolari <kolari1@cs.umbc.edu>
Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2004 01:26:20 -0400
Message-ID: <41525E7C.7040703@cs.umbc.edu>
To: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@isr.umd.edu>
CC: Jun Shen <jshen@it.swin.edu.au>, public-sws-ig@w3.org

Bijan,

I had related questions about existing execution support for OWL-S, 
since you mentioned two of them here. Also I am relatively new to the 
OWL-S domain.

1. Does there exist any comparison of the below mentioned execution 
environments. Each one of them will probably fit well in
their own domain of interest.

2. Do these environments support "Compensation Handling " ( from the DB 
area ) or "Scope", "Exceptions" ( from the programming language area). 
As per my understanding these are very important for a process model to 
handle varying execution conditions. I am also not sure how the OWL-S 
language (process) allows specifying such entities. All of the above is 
ofcourse taken from the BPEL domain and its capabilities.  Note that my 
point here is not that a BPEL execution platform is better.

3. Does there exist an analysis of process model capabilities against - 
say the popular workflow patterns ( 
http://tmitwww.tm.tue.nl/research/patterns/patterns.htm )

Thanks,
-- Pranam
_____________________________________________________________________

Pranam Kolari 						
Department of Computer Science
University of Maryland, Baltimore County	 
Baltimore, MD 21250				

Contact:
(Work) +1 410 455 3971 :---: (Home) +1 410 536 4772
kolari1@cs.umbc.edu    :---: http://www.cs.umbc.edu/~kolari1
_____________________________________________________________________


Bijan Parsia wrote:

>
> On Sep 22, 2004, at 8:27 PM, Jun Shen wrote:
>
>> I supposed BPEL or ebXML may be good at execution of e-services while 
>> OWL-S enables matchmaking. :-)
>
>
> OWL-S process models are perfectly executable. As mentioned, our group 
> has a native OWL-S executer (in our OWL-S API), as does CMU (with 
> their DAML/OWL-S virtual machine). Neither of these compile to BPEL or 
> ebXML.
>
> Fujistu's Task Computing project uses the OWL-S API with our 
> reasonable Pellet to support user driven composition of OWL-S 
> described services and the execution of those compositions (i.e., 
> CompositeServices). We've published on our use of the SHOP2 planner to 
> automate composition of executable OWL-S compositions.
>
> Hmm. Now I notice the past tense of your "supposed". Does this mean 
> you no longer suppose that?
>
> Cheers,
> Bijan.
>
>


-- 
_____________________________________________________________________

Pranam Kolari 						
Department of Computer Science
University of Maryland, Baltimore County	 
Baltimore, MD 21250				

Contact:
(Work) +1 410 455 3971 :---: (Home) +1 410 536 4772
kolari1@cs.umbc.edu    :---: http://www.cs.umbc.edu/~kolari1
_____________________________________________________________________
Received on Thursday, 23 September 2004 05:26:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:32:46 UTC