- From: Drew McDermott <drew.mcdermott@yale.edu>
- Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 14:54:43 -0500
- To: public-sws-ig@w3.org
> [Martin Gulich]
>
> If so, I think that the Choice structure is not very useful when the output
> of the process is conditionally decided in the Results. For when the output
> of the process is decided based on the conditions in the Results, this very
> output might not have been produced by the component chosen from the
> Choice-bag. Consider the composite process SignInAlternatives in the
> FullCongoBuyExample: if an account already exists, the output is bound to
> the output of SignInSequence, otherwise it is bound to the output of
> CreateAcctSequence. Both of these processes are in the Choice-bag of
> SignInAlternatives. But how do we know that the correct component in the
> Choice-bag has been executed? For a machine that automatically interprets
> the description of SignInAlternatives to know this, it must first inspect
> the conditions of all the Results of SignInAlternatives, before it chooses a
> component from the Choice-bag and executes it. I think this makes Choice
> (implicitly) equal to the If-Then-Else control structure, but more diffuse.
> So to conclude, the Choice control structure is only safe to use when no
> conditions are present in the Result descriptions of the process.
Yes. This issue is what led to the introduction of the 'produce'
control construct into OWL-S. In a composite process, it is often
clumsy or impossible to specify outputs in a 'result' block. Instead,
at the relevant point in the control flow, one writes (in the surface
syntax):
produce(output1 <= expression1, output2 <= expression2, ...)
In the RDF syntax, one writes
<Produce>
<producedBinding>
<OutputBinding>
<toParam rdf:resouce="output1"/>
<valueData>expression1</valueData>
</OutputBinding>
<OutputBinding>
<toParam rdf:resouce="output2"/>
<valueData>expression2</valueData>
</OutputBinding>
...
</producedBinding>
</Produce>
Unfortunately, the Congo process model hasn't been updated. I am
working on generating a surface-syntax version with a consistent RDF
translation.
-- Drew McDermott
Yale University
Computer Science Department
Ontology recapitulates philology -- Larry Birnbaum
Received on Thursday, 10 March 2005 19:54:20 UTC