- From: Sheila McIlraith <sheila@cs.toronto.edu>
- Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 13:38:45 -0400 (EDT)
- To: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@isr.umd.edu>
- Cc: public-sws-ig@w3.org, Ryusuke Masuoka <ryusuke.masuoka@us.fujitsu.com>
Bijan, I'm not sure I understand your question, but let me respond and if I haven't answered your question, please let me know! The objective of FLOWS was to develop a FOL ontology describing Web services. We did it (or at least we did a reasonable first pass at it. There are lots of things we'd like to expand upon.) FLOWS is an FOL ontology of Web services. --- Begin Aside (FLOWS background) ------------------------- As an aside for those of you who don't know much about FLOWS [1], one of our objectives was to provide an ontology for Web services that - addressed some of the representational short-comings of OWL-S, and - that was created in a sufficiently expressive language so that the models (interpretations) of the ontology reflected the intended interpretation of the ontology. Note that this was not the case w/ OWL-S. OWL was not sufficiently expressive to represent the Web service process model. While OWL (and thus OWL-S) had a well-defined semantics, the interpretations of the OWL-S ontology allowed some unintended interpretations. So...the semantics of the OWL-S process model is specified by a translation to more expressive languages and also by suggestive syntax and the english language description in adjoining technical documents. (Always lots more to say, but I'll leave it at that) ---End Aside ---------------------------------------- OWL (and thus OWL-S) ontologies are Web documents and thus can be referenced by means of a URI. As such classes, properties, individuals in OWL ontologies are all associated with URIs. If we wish to make FLOWS or a Web-variant of FLOWS into a Web document (and there are lots of reasons for doing this) then it would make sense to define concepts using URIs. Nevertheless, that was not our primary objective. - Sheila [1] http://www.daml.org/services/swsf/1.0/swso/ ====================================================================== Sheila McIlraith -- Dept of Computer Science, University of Toronto www.cs.toronto.edu/~sheila -- sheila [at] cs [dot] toronto [dot] edu Phone: 416-946-8484 -- Fax: 416-978-1455 ====================================================================== On Thu, 15 Sep 2005, Bijan Parsia wrote: > > On Sep 15, 2005, at 1:11 PM, Sheila McIlraith wrote: > > > Ryu, > > > > That's correct. The purpose of FLOWS was to develop of first-order > > logic ontology for Web services. We do not (yet) use URIs to specify > > concepts. > > I don't understand the dialectical point of the second sentence. Even > in developing a FOL ontology for Web services, it might be nice to have > URIs for the specific concepts to serve as a common terminological > basis for various encodings in Semantic Web languages. > > If it's just, "We didn't get round to it and KIF doesn't make it easy > or inevitable out of the box" well, that's ok, of course :) > > Cheers, > Bijan. > > >
Received on Thursday, 15 September 2005 17:38:56 UTC