RE: semantic modeling, OWL-S, WSMO, REST, etc.

It's good to know OWL-S people may wish to expand their specifications for
semantic modeling and deployment with other user groups. What I suggest is
that whether we transfer request/response message by any Internet protocol,
OWL-S's service description and process profile can be deployed. I think
it's at least a good news to OWL-S since even RESTful Web service can deploy
your specification. I think it can be a success for OWL-S that should not
decline such broad chances. 

If you have interest to such applications, I can show you my developments
for demonstration, one is a standard WSDL Web service, the other maybe a
so-called RESTful one. Both applications invoke remote GIS (Geographic
Information System) Server functions to perform exactly the same functions
and return the exactly same response by exchanging exactly the same
request/response message (which can be specified by either OWL-S or WSMO). 

If ALL such processes can be exactly the same, I think we should choose the
easist way since not all people can understand CS jargons, logics, etc. If
we see how Internet/Web is so popular today, we can understand it's just
because such technology is EASY and EFFICIENT for development and
deployment. The more complex the system, the less the user.

-----Original Message-----
From: Battle, Steven Andrew
To: Shi, Xuan
Cc: public-sws-ig@w3.org
Sent: 11/16/05 10:48 AM
Subject: RE: [fwd] Draft charters for work on Semantics for WS

The aim of this charter is specifically about semantic annotations for
WSDL, so its about seeing where the existing W3C WS stack hooks into the
SWS work. It doesn't mean that work on semantic modelling in general
ends here, or that people can't continue to explore other groundings for
OWL-S or WSMO. 

On the other hand, take a look at:
http://www.pacificspirit.com/blog/2005/03/02/yahoo_search_web_service_in
_wsdl_20
Which demonstrates that you can model RESTful service in WSDL 2.0 (once
you've got your head round it).
Steve.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Shi, Xuan [mailto:xshi@GEO.WVU.edu] 
> Sent: 16 November 2005 13:47
> To: Battle, Steven Andrew
> Cc: 'public-sws-ig@w3.org'
> Subject: RE: [fwd] Draft charters for work on Semantics for WS
> Importance: High
> 
> Grounding to WSDL limits the power of OWL-S for SWS deployment.
> 
> As a service provider, you described your service in OWL-S. 
> Then as a service requester, if I send a request exactly 
> based on your service description, you should understand how 
> to process my request.
> 
> Since this request, an XML document, can be sent to you 
> either via WSDL/SOAP or via HTTP/POST or another Internet 
> protocol, thus your choice of grounding to WSDL limits OWL-S' 
> deployment in more broadly applications. 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Battle, Steven Andrew
> To: public-sws-ig@w3.org
> Sent: 11/16/05 5:28 AM
> Subject: RE: [fwd] Draft charters for work on Semantics for WS
> 
> 
> The WSDL-S team openly acknowledge the strong relationship 
> between WSDL-S and OWL-S, so this should be clarified in the 
> SAW working group charter, which currently recognises only 
> once source of input. One can see the core elements of WSDL-S 
> in the OWL-S submission. This identifies OWL-S extensions for 
> WSDL message (owl-s-parameter), binding and operation 
> (owl-s-process) definitions.
> 
> The relevant sections of the OWL-S submission can be found in section
> 6.2
> http://www.w3.org/Submission/2004/SUBM-OWL-S-20041122#SECTION0
> 0062000000
> 000000000
> 
> This proposal is exactly along the lines of the WSDL working 
> group charter. I feel strongly that in the interests of 
> clarity the sentence below in the charter should be revised:
> 
> "A Member Submission, WSDL-S, related to this work, has been 
> acknowledged by W3C and should be used as one input to the 
> Working Group."
> 
> To something like:
> 
> "Member Submissions related to this work, WSDL-S and OWL-S 
> (see 'Grounding OWL-S Services with WSDL and SOAP'), have 
> been acknowledged by W3C and should be used as input to the 
> Working Group."
> 
> Steve Battle (Hewlett-Packard). 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: public-sws-ig-request@w3.org
> > [mailto:public-sws-ig-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Carine Bournez
> > Sent: 15 November 2005 14:15
> > To: public-sws-ig@w3.org
> > Cc: www-ws@w3.org
> > Subject: [fwd] Draft charters for work on Semantics for WS
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > This is a copy of an announcement sent last week to the W3C 
> membership 
> > (on the member-ws@w3.org mailing list).
> > All comments welcome! (for non members, on the public-sws-ig@w3.org 
> > mailing list). Thank you.
> > 
> > 
> > > 
> > > Following the announcement in [1], two charters have been 
> drafted, 
> > > corresponding to the two points previously described.
> > > 
> > > The first one is a Semantics for Web Services
> > Characterization Group.
> > > 
> > > 	http://www.w3.org/2005/10/sws-charac-charter.html
> > > 
> > > It specifically includes 4 issues to discuss.
> > > 
> > > The second one is Semantic Annotations for WSDL Working Group.
> > > 
> > > 	http://www.w3.org/2005/10/sa-ws-charter.html
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Discussion on both these charters should happen on this
> > mailing list
> > > (member-ws@w3.org).
> > > Thank you!
> > > 
> > > 
> > > [1]
> > > 
> > 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-ac-members/2005JulSep/0024.htm
> > > l
> > > 
> > 
> > ----- End forwarded message -----
> > 
> > --
> > Carine Bournez -+- W3C Sophia-Antipolis
> > 
> > 
> > 
>

Received on Wednesday, 16 November 2005 18:08:17 UTC