Re: Semantics for Web Services Characterization

Steve,

Let me try to clarify the intent (it seems to me that there is a deep 
misunderstanding).

> Given this rich context to draw on, it surprises me that the
> 'characterization' charter seems to limit itself almost exclusively to
> "solutions like WSDL-S", which I read as invocation and a bit of
> discovery. This really isn't going to attract many relevant scenarios.

The charter does not limit itslef to solutions like WSDL-S. The idea is
to think about building a technology stack, starting from WSDL, adding
some semantic extensions (generic enough to be able to build on top
of these) and continue on those footprints. The goal is precisely to
define the scope of what could be done (invocation? discovery? more?).
The proposal is to find out and demonstrate what can't be achieved
with the current Web Services technologies.

> Given that the mission is to analyse "real-scale applications", why
> eliminate composition, mediation, validation from the outset? For
> example, there's great opportunity here to work with the SWS 'mediation'
> Challenge <http://deri.stanford.edu/challenge/2006/> organised by DERI
> Stanford.

Again, the charter does not exclude any of those, because those 
particular "key points" should be determined by the group.

> "The mission of the Semantics for Web Services Characterization Group is
> to continue in the footprints of solutions like WSDL-S and study the
> field of applications and identify key points that are not immediately
> solved using Web services technologies."
> 
> could be changed to something like:
> 
> "The mission of the Semantics for Web Services Characterization Group is
> to study the field of applications addressed by technologies such as
> WSDL-S, OWL-S, WSMO and SWSF and to identify key points that are not
> immediately solved using Web services technologies."

Restricting the scope to the fields that are already addressed by 
existing technologies is IMHO a bad idea for characterization. The goal
is to derive the functionalities from the use cases, not from the
technologies developed in the area.

I hope this helps.

-- 
Carine Bournez -+- W3C Sophia-Antipolis

Received on Thursday, 17 November 2005 17:42:18 UTC