- From: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.umd.edu>
- Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 14:30:27 -0400
- To: jdart@tibco.com, Assaf Arkin <arkin@intalio.com>
- Cc: Jean-Jacques Dubray <jjd@eigner.com>, "'Burdett David'" <david.burdett@commerceone.com>, Daniel_Austin@grainger.com, public-ws-chor@w3.org
At 9:53 -0700 5/13/03, Jon Dart wrote: >I'm tending towards Assaf's point of view here. However, there is >DAML-S to consider also. Per our charter, we are suppose to liase >with the DAML-S group. But this doesn't imply a non-WSDL binding >because apparently DAML-S is based on extensions within the WSDL >framework. > >--Jon > DAML-S provides a grounding that works directly in WSDL (as I demoed at the kickoff f2f), but which provides an intermediate layer so it can ground in other services (we use device services in UPnP as well). My personal vote would be for us to do something like this - making WSDL our primary target, and one for which we develop a direct mapping, but allowing the possibility of relocatability of choreographies. -JH > >Assaf Arkin wrote: > >> I just don't see those other technologies as being interesting >>that's all. My personal opinion. In a W3C working group I would >>prefer to pick all the relevant technologies that the W3C maps out >>as interesting as part of the WSA. So far I've only heard of WSDL. >>If it boils down to one technology and that makes my life easier, >>all the better. What other technologies do you suggest we look into? >> -- Professor James Hendler hendler@cs.umd.edu Director, Semantic Web and Agent Technologies 301-405-2696 Maryland Information and Network Dynamics Lab. 301-405-6707 (Fax) Univ of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742 240-731-3822 (Cell) http://www.cs.umd.edu/users/hendler
Received on Tuesday, 13 May 2003 14:30:46 UTC