W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-sws-ig@w3.org > July 2007

Re: SAWSDL in WXMO-MX [was Re: Commercial/Real-world Semantic Web Services?]

From: Matthias Klusch <klusch@dfki.de>
Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2007 14:31:15 +0200
Message-ID: <468E3613.6000308@dfki.de>
To: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@isr.umd.edu>
CC: public-sws-ig@w3.org

dear bijan,

it gets even more interesting now:
W3C is pleased to announce the advancement of "Semantic Annotations for 
WSDL and XML Schema" to Proposed Recommendation:

Pointing to our very brief discussion (below), i am wondering whether
there will be any need for an event that is going to discuss this and
the consequences for not only the large R&D investments on owl-s, wsml, 
swsf world wide but the vision of semantic web services itself?
personally, i would highly appreciate to obtain some valuable answers
from the community and the W3C representatives on this publicly
and transparently at such a forum (without side-wars), maybe at the next
iswc conference?

what do you think?

cordial regs, matthias

Bijan Parsia schrieb:

  >> well, from what i have seen so far about trying to partially marry
>> WSML with SWASDL (WSDL-S) that might be interesting for industrial
>> practice. however, as far as i can (quickly) read from the working  draft
>> of SWASDL, it provides some flexibility in basically attaching  anything
>> you want (semantic models by modelREference) but leaving the agent  alone
>> when it comes to formal reasoning upon these models to find  grounded 
>> relations and dependencies between heterogeneous concepts  and data;
>> the xsd (schema lifting and lowering) mappings are merely syntactic at
>> data type level - means at the same level as WSDL analyzer / mapping
>> tools.
> Yes. If I read you right, this has long been my complaint about  SAWSDL. 
> They're just hooks without any semantics to the hooks. This  worries me 
> (and I don't see the advantage over plain WSDL  extensibility).
> For example, if I use a modelReference...what does it *mean*? Is that  
> *in* the model as well? E.g.,:
>     http://www.w3.org/TR/sawsdl/#AnnotatingOperations
> """The annotation of the operation element carries a reference to a  
> concept in a semantic model that provides a high level description of  
> the operation, specifies its behavioral aspects or includes other  
> semantic definitions."""
> It does all this? Any of this? I think of high level descriptions as  
> being pretty vague whereas a behavioral specification is much tighter  
> (is this in terms of preconditions and effects?).
> But this is a disagreement with the basic premise of SWASDL and WSDL- S: 
> I don't see that it does anything that would permit substantive  
> interop. I.e., all the work is left to d.
> Cheers,
> Bijan.

Dr. Matthias Klusch
German Research Center for Artificial Intelligence (DFKI)
Stuhlsatzenhausweg 3, 66123 Saarbruecken, Germany
Phone: +49-681-302-5297, Fax: +49-681-302-2235
Deutsches Forschungszentrum fuer Kuenstliche Intelligenz GmbH
Firmensitz: Trippstadter Strasse 122, D-67663 Kaiserslautern
Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. mult. Wolfgang Wahlster (Vorsitzender)
Dr. Walter Olthoff
Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats:
Prof. Dr. h.c. Hans A. Aukes
Amtsgericht Kaiserslautern, HRB 2313
Received on Friday, 6 July 2007 12:29:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:33:00 UTC