W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-semann@w3.org > June 2006

Re: SAWSDL and "effects"

From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 13:14:32 -0400
Message-Id: <16A55D87-52C3-405E-808A-81B452DF0B3D@cs.man.ac.uk>
Cc: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.umd.edu>, SAWSDL public list <public-ws-semann@w3.org>
To: Jacek Kopecky <jacek.kopecky@deri.org>

On Jun 10, 2006, at 3:00 PM, Jacek Kopecky wrote:

> Dear Jim,
>
> I agree with you very much on the usefulness of knowing whether an
> operation has some significant side effects or not. It seems that you
> basically need to know whether an operation is "safe" in Web
> Architecture terms [1]. Please note that WSDL 2.0 [2] has an extension
> called "Operation Safety" which allows you to annotate your WSDL  
> with a
> claim that an operation is safe. This mechanism is trivially  
> portable to
> WSDL 1.1 as well. Do you think this would help you?

That seems to cover a fair bit.

> Secondly, I am of the opinion that preconditions and effects can  
> both be
> referenced using a modelReference. Yes, you cannot just point to a
> simple expression, you have to point to something that will say that
> this expression is a precondition or an effect, but that also gives  
> you
> the opportunity to specify exactly what you mean by a precondition  
> or by
> an effect, i.e. what is the context for evaluating the expression.

I would think you would need both the precondition and effect bundled  
together, since they often share variables.

> This
> is very similar to a proposal we recently had for moving interface
> category to a tiny ontology + modelReference. Do you think that this
> approach would be useful for you?
>
> Lastly, I am prepared to consider something like preconditions or
> effects, whether or not it is based on modelReference, provided that
> somebody gives the WG a fully-fledged proposal and it does not  
> generate
> significant controversy.
[snip]

Ha. Hmm. Actually, one could do something reasonable I think with  
SPARQL (not *THE* P&E, but *an* P&E).

Cheers,
Bijan.
Received on Sunday, 11 June 2006 18:49:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:58:45 UTC