- 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