Re: W3C and SWS

Xuan Shi wrote:

> Dear Dhavalkumar, Drs. Martin, Klusch, and others,
> 
> First of all, I do want to apologize to all of you if what I posted
> recently in the list make you feel frustrated. Although that was not my
> intent, I know some words overstep the marks beyond academic discussion
> when they were misconstrued publically and disrespectfully. With my good
> faith to promote the research on semantic Web services, I do hope those
> whom I insulted and all others could forgive my inappropriate behavior
> and look forward to a more close cooperation in this community.
> 
> Let me try to elaborate what I think about semantic Web services for
> your kind attention and comments. When we target the goal  of semantic
> Web services as the dynamic and automatic service discovery,
> matchmaking, composition and integration, SWS is a whole system like a
> car. We cannot say the brake is perfect, but the car cannot run. Or we
> cannot say the car runs fast and it has the best engine but it cannot
> stop. Or the car has world No. 1 battery but that car is a junk. And so
> on. It's the same view and logic to SWS. 
> 
> For this reason, we cannot just work on certain components of SWS, but
> have to consider how to make the whole systems functions correctly and
> appropriately. No matter how perfect each component is, if the car (SWS)
> does not function well, it may just look like a negative junk. However,
> when we see that the car functions well, this car may not have the best
> components.
> 
> In my opinion, SWS as a whole system should have at least three
> components: a "shared" ontology definition on each service domain, a
> centralized service registry system that enforces such "shared" ontology
> definition (anyone who wants to register the service into the system, it
> has to agree with the semantic definition specified in that shared
> ontology definition), and a "standardized" interface to enable the
> dynamic invocation. The shared ontology definition may enable the
> dynamic service discovery and matchmaking through the centrailized
> registry to identify certain Web services that matches the search
> criteria. When the agent can identify a list of Web services, it can
> invoke anyone in that list without re-programming because all such
> services have a standardized interface. 
> 

I cannot fully follow your narrative emissions - but related to 
"centralized service registry system that enforces such "shared" 
ontology" " etc - get in contact to Zlatina Marinova from Ontotext, she 
and her group are sucessfully working in direction of DSWS-R - 
Distributed Semantic Web Service Registries oriented on WSMO etc.
Try to catch some details from her - and to become a bit more precise 
with your car problem description ...

BR
  hjn


> Again, I apologize to all of you in this community, especially to team
> members of OWL-S, WSMO, and SAWSDL, for those recent unhappy events I
> generated. I welcome any kind of criticism and advice from you
> publically or by private email contact. I hope my suggestion would show
> some positive points for attention and discussion.
> 
> Best wishes,
> 
> Xuan
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>>>>"dhavalkumar thakker" <dhavalkumar@xsmail.com> 10/17/2006 5:12 AM
>>>>
> 
> 
> I think Tim Berners Lee answered the question, didnt he? 
> 
> Dear shi,
> 
> with all respect, if you find something is wrong, please suggest
> something which you 
> think is right, inplace of just pointing out to stuff which you think
> is
> wrong...
> Because all we are getting from you is negative, negative and more
> negative...
> 
> 
> 
> best regards,
> 
> Dhavalkumar
> 
>

Received on Friday, 20 October 2006 11:26:06 UTC