W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-sws-ig@w3.org > March 2006

WSDL-S and the new WG

From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@isr.umd.edu>
Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 06:59:30 -0500
Message-Id: <a32f99307ef049dfa637e1c17b3703f4@isr.umd.edu>
To: SWS-IG <public-sws-ig@w3.org>

Looking at the submission 
<http://www.w3.org/2005/04/FSWS/Submissions/17/WSDL-S.htm>:

"""One of the ways the semantic Web community is working to address 
these issues is by developing a semantic markup language for Web 
Services such as OWL-S [OWL-S] and WSML [WSML], based on description 
logic [DL] and F-logic [F-Logic] concepts, respectively. While the 
semantic expressivity is rich in these approaches, they require the 
creation of new semantic models of services on top of the syntactic 
WSDL specification of a service. Also, they assume that everyone uses 
OWL [OWL] for representing ontologies"""

WSML assume that everyone uses OWL? I think not ;)

Also, while profiles in OWL-S are only OWL, preconditions and effects 
are parameterizable, as are input and output type (though they must be 
URI identified).

Ok, that's just a bit of nitpicking...though it did jump out at me :)

The real question is that WSDL-S, the current version, *does* define 
precondition and effect (for example) elements (to be children of 
operation elements). Are these ruled out of scope?

(There are many many issues even when you agree on the langauges for 
expressing them, e.g., where they are to be evaluated. (Which might not 
be hard or could be very hard, depending.)

Actually, WSDL-S seems to include hooks for most of the OWL-S profile, 
with reference to OWL-S....er...isn't this supposed to be 
controversial? What am I missing?

Cheers,
Bijan.
Received on Tuesday, 21 March 2006 11:59:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:32:52 UTC