- From: Marco Luca Sbodio <marco.sbodio@hp.com>
- Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 10:16:29 -0500 (EST)
- To: "Battle, Steven Andrew" <steve.battle@hp.com>
- Cc: "Chris Parish" <chris.parish@oxfordcc.co.uk>, public-sws-ig@w3.org
Hi Steve and Chris, I write some ideas below. Your comments are very welcome. marcos On Thu, January 5, 2006 9:28, Battle, Steven Andrew said: > > Chris, I've suggested a few ideas inline. Hope this helps. > Take with a pinch of salt as nothing is tested. > Steve. > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: public-sws-ig-request@w3.org >> [mailto:public-sws-ig-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Chris Parish >> Sent: 04 January 2006 13:20 >> To: public-sws-ig@w3.org >> Subject: Web Service Composition using OWL-S >> >> >> I am currently attempting to describe web services using >> OWL-S in such a way that I can perform automatic web service >> composition. >> >> Consider the following simple example. >> >> Ontology >> -------- >> Ontology has a class Person with properties ID1, ID2, Name, >> where ID1/ID2 are integer values and Name is a string. >> >> Web Services >> ------------ >> Two web service operations exist which obtain ID2 given ID1 >> and Name given ID2, ie: >> >> int ID1toID2(int ID1) >> String ID2toName(int ID2) >> >> Composition >> ----------- >> I want to generate a composition which given a person's ID1 >> returns their Name. >> >> >> Currently I am using a custom format to describe the web >> services using the following rules: >> >> (?person hasData ID1) -> (?person hasData ID2) >> (?person hasData ID2) -> (?person hasData Name) >> > > I assume that ID1, ID2, Name here aren't variables but a convention for > asserting that fact that you have ID1, ID2... > You probably need to quote those values and place hasData in a suitable > namespace. :) > Incidentally, you really only need to make a unary assertion about > person here eg. (?person rdf:type eg:hasID1). I think that things are slightly different. Chris writes that he has an Ontology defining Person: [[ Ontology has a class Person with properties ID1, ID2, Name, where ID1/ID2 are integer values and Name is a string. ]] so, it should be something like the following: <ex:Person> <rdf:type> <owl:Class> . <ex:ID2> <rdf:type> <owl:DatatypeProperty> . <ex:ID2> <rdfs:domain> <ex:Person> . <ex:ID2> <rdfs:range> <xsd:int> . <ex:Name> <rdf:type> <owl:DatatypeProperty> . <ex:Name> <rdfs:range> <xsd:string> . <ex:Name> <rdfs:domain> <ex:Person> . <ex:ID1> <rdf:type> <owl:DatatypeProperty> . <ex:ID1> <rdfs:domain> <ex:Person> . <ex:ID1> <rdfs:range> <xsd:int> . The two web services are therefore expressing "mapping of one DatatypeProperty of class Person to another": (WS1): ID1 to ID2 (WS2): ID2 to Name (to be more concrete, you may think of ID1 as the "Passport Number" and ID2 as the "Social Security Number", assuming that both can be expressed as xsd:int). In my understanding, the issue is "how to express in OWL-S the above mappings", or, more explicitly, "how to express in OWL-S the following": - for WS1: given a value of DatatypeProperty ID1 of a Person ?p, then WS1 returns the corresponding value of DatatypeProperty ID2 of the same Person ?p - for WS2: given a value of DatatypeProperty ID2 of a Person ?p, then WS2 returns the corresponding value of DatatypeProperty Name of the same Person ?p My attempt for WS1 is the following: [[ <process:hasInput> <process:Input rdf:ID="ID1in"> <process:parameterType rdf:datatype="&xsd;#anyURI">&xsd;#int</process:parameterType> </process:Input> </process:hasInput> <process:hasLocal> <process:Local rdf:ID="Person"> <process:parameterType rdf:datatype="&xsd;#anyURI">&ex;#Person</process:parameterType> </process:Local> </process:hasLocal> <process:hasPrecondition> <expr:SWRL-Condition> <rdfs:label>ID1(Person, ID1in)</rdfs:label> <expr:expressionLanguage rdf:resource="&expr;#SWRL"/> <expr:expressionBody rdf:parseType="Literal"> <ruleml:_body> <swrlx:datavaluedPropertyAtom swrlx:property="ID1"> <ruleml:var>&thisNamespace;#Person</ruleml:var> <ruleml:var>&thisNamespace;#ID1in</ruleml:var> </swrlx:datavaluedPropertyAtom> </ruleml:_body> </expr:expressionBody> </expr:SWRL-Condition> </process:hasPrecondition> <process:hasOutput> <process:Output rdf:ID="ID2out"> <process:parameterType rdf:datatype="&xsd;#anyURI">&xsd;#int</process:parameterType> </process:Output> </process:hasOutput> <process:hasResult> <process:Result rdf:ID="SuccessfulResult"> <process:inCondition> <expr:SWRL-Condition> <rdfs:label>ID2(Person, ID2out)</rdfs:label> <expr:expressionLanguage rdf:resource="&expr;#SWRL"/> <expr:expressionBody rdf:parseType="Literal"> <ruleml:_body> <swrlx:datavaluedPropertyAtom swrlx:property="ID2"> <ruleml:var>&thisNamespace;#Person</ruleml:var> <ruleml:var>&thisNamespace;#ID2out</ruleml:var> </swrlx:datavaluedPropertyAtom> </ruleml:_body> </expr:expressionBody> </expr:SWRL-Condition> </process:inCondition> <process:withOutput> <process:OutputBinding> <process:toParam rdf:resource="#ID2out"/> <process:valueSource> <process:ValueOf> <process:theVar rdf:resource="#ID2out"/> </process:ValueOf> </process:valueSource> </process:OutputBinding> </process:withOutput> <!-- IMHO there is no effect, so I skip process:hasEffect --> </process:Result> </process:hasResult> ]] What do you think?
Received on Sunday, 8 January 2006 15:16:32 UTC