- From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@isr.umd.edu>
- Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 12:53:24 -0500
- To: David Martin <martin@AI.SRI.COM>
- Cc: public-sws-ig <public-sws-ig@w3.org>, Amit Sheth <amit@cs.uga.edu>
A small technical point which may have been brought up before. (I can't really speak to the politics since 1) I've been traveling for the past two weeks and haven't caught up and, alas, am unlikely to be able to and 2) as y'all know from the workshop I'm a bit resistant to moving to a working group in this area, though this one seems somewhat scoped.) One difference between the WSDL-S and OWL-S, as I understand it, approaches that might now be mooted by WSDL 2.0 but is perhaps worth raising is that OWL-S descriptions are, in general practice, out of band annotations on the WSDL document. That is, the OWL-S document points to the WSDL document and doesn't *require* any modifications to the WSDL. This allows for multiple variant descriptions, perhaps from third parties. Now some of this may be mooted by the RDF mapping...but probably not :) In any case, there are clear advantages to the "out of band" annotation approach, especially for adoption, so I would like to see such support explored by a working group. (In other words, it's not just integrating with WSDL the spec via extension but integrating with deployed WSDL documents that is an issue.) Cheers, Bijan.
Received on Saturday, 19 November 2005 17:53:30 UTC