Re: sws matchmaker contest

According to W3C specification @ 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." 

Semantic Web Services Challenge 2006 contest has complied with the above W3C specification, but it seems the proposed sws matchmaker contest may include other kind of "services". I hope the organizors will pay attention to W3C's statement: - There are many things that might be called "Web services" in the world at large - otherwise people will be confused again by such vague terminologies.

The problem for the Semantic Web Services Challenge 2006 is, the organizors used lots of "fake services". Such fake services, for example, muller.wsdl, racer.wsdl, runner.wsdl, walker.wsdl, etc. only provided a simplified interface like "function F (inputObject): outputObject". However, in real world practice, functional interface can be more complex.

Given the following "fake services", three Web service developers develop exactly the same kind of service/function with the same service and function name, the same interface structure (three input objects and 1 output object), and the same input/output object name, but with different order of the input objects documented in WSDL or OO diagram:

service: function F(obj1, obj2, obj3):obj4
service: function F(obj3, obj2, obj1):obj4
service: function F(obj1, obj3, obj2):obj4 (...we can have more different combinations of course)

Can I say that by matchmaking, machine will understand that all these three services and functions can do the same thing? But can you say that such a result from matchmaking or service composition will enable the dynamic invocation of such services, i.e. "without any reprogramming, a software system could have the flexibility to use various services that do the same kind of job but have different APIs" (Burstein 2004) - the last and final goal of SWS ? It seems not because to invoke such services, we have to reprogram something in such process as: obj4 = service.F(obj1, obj2, obj3), or obj4 = service.F(obj3, obj2, obj1), or obj4 = service.F(obj1, obj3, obj2), in case any of them does not work we have to sue the other services.

If adding semantic annotation into WSDL cannot enable the dynamic invocation of services, the last and final goal of SWS, such service matchmaking and compostion contest should add some more challenges with a focus on the real world practice and existing Web services to see how the result contributes to the last and final goal of SWS.

Regards,

Xuan



>>> Matthias Klusch <klusch@dfki.de> 08/24/06 1:17 PM >>>

Dear Emanuele,

thanks for your feedback!!

We are of course aware of the sws challenge
and in part impressed by the results produced
(only WSDL services were provided for the scenarios).
however, the planned matchmaker contest aims at obtaining
the results of a comparative evaluation of the recall/precision,
and runtime performance of different owl-s / wsmo matchmaker
over a given owl-s / wsmo service retrieval test collection (like TREC
in the IR domain). if there is a chance to obtain such results
from the recent sws challenge, pls let us know.
another related event is at this year's ISWC, however, the organisers 
told us that they want to focus on business sws certification but not
sws retrieval.

cordial regards, matthias

Emanuele Della Valle schrieb:

> Dear Matthias,
> 
> a similar activities is ongoing within the Semantic Web Services the challenge discovery scenario [2] and the related test cases. 
> 
> The solutions to the challenge collected in June are available at [3]
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Emanuele
> 
> [1] http://sws-challenge.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page 
> [2] http://sws-challenge.org/wiki/index.php/Scenario:_Shipment_Discovery 
> [3] http://sws-challenge.org/wiki/index.php/Workshop_Budva 
> 
> --
> Emanuele Della Valle
> CEFRIEL - Politecnico di Milano
> Via Fucini, 2 * 20133 Milano (Italy)
> p. +39 0223954324 e. dellavalle@cefriel.it
> f. +39 0223954524 w. http://swa.cefriel.it/
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/emanueledellavalle
> 
> 
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: public-sws-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:public-sws-ig-request@w3.org]
>>On Behalf Of Matthias Klusch
>>Sent: mercoledì 23 agosto 2006 15.51
>>To: public-sws-ig@w3.org
>>Subject: sws matchmaker contest
>>
>>
>>
>>dear all,
>>
>>in due course of planning a semantic web service matchmaker contest,
>>i am currently looking for
>>
>>* all kinds of *implemented* owl-s or wsmo matchmakers
>>   in particular those which have not been published yet,
>>   but might be interested in participating in such a contest.
>>
>>* partners that would be willing to initiate or further develop service
>>   retrieval test collections for measuring the retrieval performance of
>>   these matchmakers such as the owls-tc v2 for owl-s (i do not know
>>   yet of any wsmo test collection)
>>
>>any feedback is highly appreciated!
>>
>>cordial regards,
>>matthias
>>
>>__________________________________________________
>>Dr. Matthias Klusch
>>German Research Center for Artificial Intelligence
>>Stuhlsatzenhausweg 3
>>66123 Saarbruecken, Germany
>>Phone: +49-681-302-5297, Fax: +49-681-302-2235
>>http://www.dfki.de/~klusch/, klusch@dfki.de
>>__________________________________________________
>>
>>
> 
> 

-- 
__________________________________________________
Dr. Matthias Klusch
German Research Center for Artificial Intelligence
Stuhlsatzenhausweg 3
66123 Saarbruecken, Germany
Phone: +49-681-302-5297, Fax: +49-681-302-2235
http://www.dfki.de/~klusch/, klusch@dfki.de
__________________________________________________

Received on Friday, 25 August 2006 04:27:24 UTC