- From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@isr.umd.edu>
- Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 06:59:30 -0500
- 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