Re: Commercial/Real-world Semantic Web Services?

Xuan,

I dont understand your preoccupation with the definition of a service. True
web services and websites are a different. If thats a problem, just use
SWS for web services. Use semantic web for web sites.

Sure, agreement is an issue but at least SW and SWS gives us a common
structure for agreement, which we did not have before.

Do you have work/suggestions for avoiding the need for agreement?

Luke




On 10/15/06, Xuan Shi <Xuan.Shi@mail.wvu.edu> wrote:
>
>
> Michael Uschold concluded a general law in his paper "Where are the
> Semantics in the Semantic Web?" published by AI Magazine, 24 (3), 25--36,
> that
>
> "The more agreement there is, the less it is necessary to have machine
> processable semantics." What are "machine processable semantics"? Maybe
> Bijan's logic modelings?
>
> This means, if we have more agreements in this community, people like
> Bijan will have nothing to do. And that why he ignored such issues and keeps
> misleading, if not cheating, the world.
>
> In the history, most people believed that the earth was the center of the
> universe. Eventually it's proved such an idea was wrong. But we all know
> what happened in the history when someone told the truth. It's the same in
> SWS community.
>
> I just hope that all people just don't believe such "authority" like Bijan
> or something else, but have to have more critical and independent spirit in
> "scientific" reesarch - pursue the truth, not the authority, as those
> well-respected scientists may be wrong, and definitely can be wrong.
>
> If anyone would like to read this paper:
> http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/109560959/PDFSTART ,
> you can see how a Nobel Prize winner in 1940s, prevented those different but
> correct approaches from discussion and publication in the history - his
> students could only make corrections and published the result after he died.
>
> In the history, even some well-respected "scientiests' wanted to send
> those who against them to Mars. Today, someone(s) in this SWS-IG just
> blocked my discussion and emails two times - they just repeated the
> historical events in nowadays.
>
> I actually don't care whether Bijan ignore me or not - my future life and
> career will not depend on anyone in this community. But Bijan cares - he
> fears about that when people know the truth and generate more
> agreements/standards/protocols, he might have to find somethign else to do.
> If we know he has such obvious vested interest on his specialties rather
> than agreement/standard/protocol, we can ignore him and his products. And
> that why he told us that he "personally don't know of any (successfully)
> commercial or production uses of OWL-S, WSMO, or the  like,..."
>
> When Bijian boasts his "Web services", ask him first whether he is talking
> about a Web-site or not. When he boasts his modelings, just ask him why and
> how can we use his modeling when we develop ''a" Web service, such as the
> favorite "AirlineTicketing" or "HotelBooking" kind of services, then we can
> understand he is actually talking about how to modeling a Web-site, not that
> two real services. If Bijan would like to remove the process modeling from
> OWL-S, I would welcome it, though there's not even a tiny bit of evidence of
> that, alas. Sigh.
>
> As a "scientist", you can igore me or anyone who is againts you, but you
> cannot ignore the problems and questions. As the chair of this IG, you
> cannot fear that people who are against you will ask you questions. At least
> in this country, the bi-partisan politics can teach you even the President
> of US  cannot ignore the problems and questions from the other-side. As a
> team leader, you have to learn a lot.
>
> Regards,
>
> Xuan
>
>
> >>> Bijan Parsia <bparsia@isr.umd.edu> 10/13/2006 3:14 PM >>>
>
> And sigh, I meant that to be private, obviously. I fully expect a
> Xuanslought. Which I shall ignore. As I recommend to everyone. If
> Xuan Shi would like to change this dynamic, I would welcome it,
> though there's not even a tiny bit of evidence of that, alas. Sigh.
>
> Well, I might as well take this faux pas as an opportunity to point
> out that, contrary to certain fantasies:
>        <http://www.w3.org/TR/ws-arch/>
> is a *note*, not a recommendation. Just one more distortion
> exaggerated into a crusade.
>
> Which is *such* a good tag line!
>
> Cheers,
> Bijan.
>
>
>
>
>
>


-- 
Luke Steller
PhD Candidate
Faculty of Information Technology
Monash University
A U S T R A L I A
=============================