W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-chor@w3.org > May 2003

Re: service type and the Semantic Web

From: Drew McDermott <drew.mcdermott@yale.edu>
Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 10:19:23 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <200305151419.h4FEJKS25966@pantheon-po03.its.yale.edu>
To: sambrosz@ipipan.waw.pl
CC: public-ws-chor@w3.org, drew.mcdermott@yale.edu

   Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 19:50:03 +0200 (CEST)
   X-PH: V4.4@mr1
   From: Stanislaw Ambroszkiewicz <sambrosz@ipipan.waw.pl>
   Reply-To: Stanislaw Ambroszkiewicz <sambrosz@ipipan.waw.pl>
   Content-MD5: IjulhG3xHeV/kiRPRGW5hA==
   X-YaleITSMailFilter: Version 1.0c (attachment(s) not renamed)

   The crucial point is to start the process from the very roots, i.e., 
   from the really primitive concepts and to specify explicitly 
   the abstraction rules.  

   I did some practical (however, still initial) work towards this direction; 
   see the documentation at http://www.ipipan.waw.pl/mas/enTish 

I'll check it out.

   As to DAML-S, one still missing point (IMO, the crucial one) 
   is the definition of well formed formulae to express precondition 
   and effect of service invocation. 

We do provide a proposal (in an appendix) for how to add these.  The
reason the proposal is tentative is that we wanted to stay within RDF,
and you simply can't do that without stretching the framework at some
point.  Our proposal is to indulge in a little reification, which
means that an ordinary RDF processor will miss the formulas.  (And
that the encoding of the formulas is rather obese.)

   IMO, precondition and effect formula together may (should!) 
   serve for expressing the complete type of a service, i.e., also 
   service interface. 

I agree.

                                             -- Drew McDermott
Received on Thursday, 15 May 2003 10:19:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:30:04 UTC