Re: Draft charters for work on Semantics for WS and WSDL 2.0 RDF mapping

Hi Massimo,

as one of the editors of the WSDL 2.0 RDF mapping, I think I can answer
this question.

Semantic annotations on WSDL will take the form of XML elements and
attributes to be embedded in WSDL documents as appropriate. The
information in these attributes and elements can also be caught in RDF
and attached appropriately to the RDF form of the WSDL document. So
basically the WSDL/XML extensions need equivalent WSDL/RDF extensions,
which should be a few properties and classes above what the WSDL
ontology provides.

WSDL 2.0 RDF mapping does not deal with extensions in general, every
extension has to have its own mapping if the information is to be
representable in RDF usefully.

Hope this helps,

Jacek

On Thu, 2005-11-17 at 14:42 +0100, Massimo Paolucci wrote:
> The Web Services Description Working Group recently proposed a WSDL 2.0 RDF mapping [1].
> The charter draft so far specifies:
> 
> > The Semantic Annotations for WSDL Working Group will provide an RDF mapping compatible with the RDF mapping for WSDL defined by the WSD Working Group.
> What is the scope of such a compatibility?  What has to be done above and beyond 
> WSDL 2.0 RDF mapping?
> 
> --- Massimo
> 
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-wsdl20-rdf-20051104/
> 
> 
> Eric Prud'hommeaux wrote: 
> > On Wed, Nov 16, 2005 at 10:28:11AM -0000, Battle, Steven Andrew wrote:
> >   
> > > 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#SECTION00062000000
> > > 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."
> > >     
> > 
> > The question of where WSDL-S and OWL-S WSDL bindings are mentioned in
> > the Semantic Annotations for WSDL charter is based on the differences
> > between the two:
> > 
> > The OWL-S Submission adds the following WSDL markup:
> >   + message/input@owl-s-parameter identifies OWL-S input or output
> >     owl-s:Parameter.
> >   + a new value for binding/encodingStyle identifies an encoding style
> >     for serializing owl-s:Parameters.
> >   + operation@owl-s-process identifies an OWL-S atomic process.
> > and properties attaching a WSDL doc to a WsdlAtomicProcessGrounding and
> > describing that WSDL:
> >   wsdlVersion
> >   wsdlDocument
> >   wsdlOperation
> >   wsdlService
> >   wsdlPort
> >   wsdlInput &
> >   wsdlOutput -- WsdlInputMessageMaps describing XSLT
> >                 transformations of I/O messages.
> >   wsdlInputMessage &
> >   wsdlOutputMessage
> > 
> > The WSDL-S Submission adds the following WSDL markup:
> >   + modelReference, I guess can be affixed to any part of the component
> >     model (pure speculation on my part).
> >   + xsd:element/schemaMappings transform (XSLT, XQuery...) to "an
> >     external domain model/ontology", which appears to be more XML.
> >   + operation/precondition &
> >     operation/effect in a format opaque to WSDL-S.
> >   + interface/category links the interface to some taxonomy opaque to
> >     (not specified by) WSDL-S.
> > 
> > I *think* that the momentum is behind adding modelReferences to WSDL
> > components. The charter is a test of that hypothesis.
> > 
> >   
> > > > -----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 -----
> > > > 
> > > >       
> > 
> >

Received on Thursday, 17 November 2005 14:54:23 UTC