- From: Xuan Shi <Xuan.Shi@mail.wvu.edu>
- Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2006 15:06:52 -0400
- To: <trp@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Cc: <public-sws-ig@w3.org>
Terry, I am trying to identify the original documentation of OWL-S and found out the following archives, besides the formal OWL-S submission to W3C, from http://www.daml.org/services/owl-s/ -: 2006-03: OWL-S 1.2 Pre-Release @ http://www.ai.sri.com/daml/services/owl-s/1.2/overview/ 2004-11: OWL-S 1.1 @ http://www.daml.org/services/owl-s/1.1/overview/ 2004-07: OWL-S 1.1 Beta @ http://www.daml.org/services/owl-s/1.1B/owl-s/owl-s.html 2003-11: OWL-S 1.0 @ http://www.daml.org/services/owl-s/1.0/owl-s.html 2003-05: DAML-S 0.9 @ http://www.daml.org/services/daml-s/0.9/daml-s.html 2002-10: DAML-S 0.7 @ http://www.daml.org/services/daml-s/0.7/daml-s.html 2001-12: DAML-S 0.6 @ http://www.daml.org/services/daml-s/2001/10/daml-s.html 2001-05: DAML-S 0.5 @ http://www.daml.org/services/daml-s/2001/05/daml-s.html All these old and new versions of DAML-S/OWL-S document contained the following paragraph: "Among the most important web resources are those that provide services. By "service'' we mean Web sites that do not merely provide static information but allow one to effect some action or change in the world, such as the sale of a product or the control of a physical device. The Semantic Web should enable users to locate, select, employ, compose, and monitor Web-based services automatically." You said - "When we wrote the original documentation, it was not talking about web sites". Did you mean you have another older version of DAML-S? I just could not find it. I need such information for bibliography review and comments anyway. Regards, Xuan >>> Terry Payne <trp@ecs.soton.ac.uk> 08/01/06 11:05 AM >>> Xuan, you are reading way too much into this, and making incorrect interpretations. When we wrote the original documentation, it was not talking about web sites - you keep banging on about this but the position you're arguing isn't an accurate representation of what was written. There are a number of different views regarding what constitutes Web Services, and what is a web service (should it be in XML? Must it have its interface defined in WSDL? What if a service grounds its interface in WSDL, but communicates directly with its peers using a KQML binding, and thus doesn't use http or xml at all???). Personally I don't want to get involved in that discussion, just as after several years of hearing similar debates about what is an autonomous agent ("oh, is it a light-sensitive switch?", for example). Finally, could you please cease firing questions in a rather aggressive manner at certain individuals? This is a large community that has been researching this field for a long time now, with all varying points of view (which make discussions interesting). However, with these recent questions, its started to feel more like a court of law (i.e. why this, why that, you said this, but you meant that, and its wrong). If you have questions, then read the *research* literature and put the pieces together as others have done. Terry On 1 Aug 2006, at 15:19, Xuan Shi wrote: > > Carine, > > W3C said @ http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/NOTE-ws-gloss-20040211/ > > "Web service > There are many things that might be called "Web services" in the world > at large. However, for the purpose of this Working Group and this > architecture, and without prejudice toward other definitions, we will > use the following definition: > > A Web service is a software system designed to support interoperable > machine-to-machine interaction over a network. It has an interface > described in a machine-processable format (specifically WSDL). Other > systems interact with the Web service in a manner prescribed by its > description using SOAP-messages, typically conveyed using HTTP with an > XML serialization in conjunction with other Web-related standards." > > As for "WSDL-based service", I just want to STRESS on W3C > terminology of > "Web services" - they should _specifically_ have a WSDL interface, > other > than Web interface, you see W3C already emphasized such limitation in > 2004 - "There are many things that might be called "Web services" > in the > world at large.", like OWL-S people - they are talking about *Web > sites*, not WSDL. I hope OWL-S people can give us a definite > explanation > why they do not follow W3C specification but keep changing and > transforming the concepts. > > Regards, > > Xuan > > > >>>> Carine Bournez <carine@w3.org> 08/01/06 4:35 AM >>> > On Tue, Aug 01, 2006 at 12:08:03AM -0400, Xuan Shi wrote: >> >> If W3C and this SWS-IG try to define service semantics for WSDL-based >> service, other than Web-site based service, people have to re-examine >> the suitability of OWL-S for SWS because OWL-S targets at a wrong > object >> (Web site) other than Web service defined by W3C. > > Now stop that FUD. This Interest Group is not trying to define > semantics > for "WSDL-based service". The term "WSDL-based" is a complete non- > sense > and you misread (once again) the definition of the WS Arch Note. > Opposing "WSDL-based" and "web-based" is of course as non-sensical as > opposing REST and WSDL. > > Of course I will not answer any of your questions, the troll is over > (at least for me, it's up to other contributors to decide if they want > to lose their time). > > > -- > Carine Bournez -+- W3C Europe > > _______________________________________________________________________ Terry R. Payne, PhD. | http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~trp/index.html AgentLink III Co-coordinator | AgentLink III - http:// www.agentlink.org University of Southampton | Voice: +44(0)23 8059 8343 [Fax: 8059 2865] Southampton, SO17 1BJ, UK | Email: terry@acm.org / trp@ecs.soton.ac.uk
Received on Thursday, 3 August 2006 19:07:28 UTC