- From: Joel Farrell <joelf@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 09:55:01 -0400
- To: Jacek Kopecky <jacek.kopecky@deri.org>
- Cc: SAWSDL WG <public-ws-semann@w3.org>
Thanks Jacek, Then I think we can keep the spec as it is - as in option number 1. On the sub-issue you raised, the spec does point to a specific element within the model and, indeed, the whole file will have to be read in order to resolve it. I think this clears the way for the support of a list of references directly in the WSDL modelReference attribute. Regards, Joel public-ws-semann-request@w3.org wrote on 04/19/2006 09:16:20 AM: > > Hi Joel, > > your issue is now logged as issue 3 at > http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/sawsdl/issues/#x3 > > I feel there is a hidden sub-issue here: > > What are we identifying in modelReference - a thing, a part of a model > (like a class in OWL or concept in WSML or something similar) or a whole > model (an OWL file, a WSML file etc.)? I believe the current draft leans > towards the former, i.e. a thing defined by the model. If that's the > case, then a thing can be described using multiple languages (like Eric > was pointing out yesterday with some kind of indirection) and so SAWSDL > could have a hard time actually saying what language is used for a > particular pointer. > > Even if the URI identifies a part of the model, resolving it can still > lead to the description of the full file, for example > http://example.org/ontology#class identifies a class, but when resolving > this, the client will actually read http://example.org/ontology > > Assuming here that modelReference does identify a thing (a part of a > model), I would go with the intent of your option 1 - our spec doesn't > say anything, the client will have to see it to know if it can > understand a particular modeling language; this will allow multiple > languages describing the same thing and the client choosing whatever it > understands best. > > Please see more comments below. > > Jacek > > On Tue, 2006-04-18 at 15:26 -0400, Joel Farrell wrote: > > Hi All, > > > > The modelReference attribute points to a concept in some semantic model and > > SAWSDL is independent of the language used to express that model. The > > question is: Do we need to identify the language as part of the annotation? > > In other words, can a tool that is processing the WSDL file determine what > > kind of a model (OWL, WSML, ODM...) is at the URI pointed to by the > > modelReference? I can think of three answers: > > > > 1. Yes, it can read the document and see if it can recognize it. This > > would require no change to our spec. > > The web also gives us things like media types so the client can do an > HTTP HEAD on the URI and see what media type it has, and this should say > whether it's an OWL file, WSML file or something else. > > > 2. Yes, but only if the URI includes a file extension like ".owl". Is > > this a reasonable restriction? If so, our spec need not change. > > I don't think the Web people would like this, URIs should be mostly > opaque to the users, and it's good practice not to include .owl (or > similar things) in URIs in fact, so that the URI needn't change when the > language choice changes. > > > 3. No, it needs to be explicitly stated. This could be done via a > > modelType attribute that pairs with the modelReference attribute or it > > could be specified once per interface or once per WSDL document > > (definitions). If something like this is needed, it will have an > > implication if we decide that a modelReference can be a list of references. > > > > The spec currently does not restrict a WSDL file from using a different > > type of model for each individual annotation. (It is silent on the issue.) > > Once this issue and the multiple models per modelReference issue is > > resolved, the spec will have to be explicit about this. > > > > Regards, > > Joel Farrell > > > > > >
Received on Friday, 21 April 2006 13:55:22 UTC