- From: Maciej Gawinecki <mgawinecki@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 00:56:43 +0200
- To: Ulrich Küster <Ulrich.Kuester@uni-jena.de>, Michal Zaremba <michal.zaremba@sti2.at>, ws-challenge@cs.georgetown.edu, "Norman M. Sadeh" <sadeh@cs.cmu.edu>, Holger Lausen <mail@holgerlausen.net>, kwokchingtsui@hsbc.com.hk, blakeb@cs.georgetown.edu, Adam Chojnacki <chojnackia@student.mini.pw.edu.pl>, public-xg-swsc@w3.org
- CC: Giacomo Cabri <giacomo.cabri@unimore.it>, Raffaele Quitadamo <quitadamo.raffaele@unimore.it>
Hello, I'm PhD student at the University of Modena, Italy. I'm currently studying the problem of automated service composition, which -- as I discovered -- is of your domain, at least when looking at WS Challenge or SWS Challenge site. Perhaps I'm meeting the same doubts you had when you were digging into this domain. Please treat them rather as my doubts, not offences. It would be great if I you could share with me with your experience or impressions. If no, please suggest me some better place (person/mailing list) where I could get comments about my thoughts. 1. This is quite artificial problem, because: a) It is desired feature of SOA to have automatically discovered services which can be later automatically composed. But this is hardly possible to verify whether your ideas of composition algorithm are effective, because there are no real test collections [1], similary like there is TREC collection for testing IR techiniques in XML domain. However, TREC collection is based on gigabates of real existing data. b) Some people can say this is a "chicken-egg" problem. There are not so much services on the Web, because techniques for describing them, discovering and composing are still inmature. But you could also say there is no such techniques, because there is not enough web services on the Web, and what can be concluded from this -- there is no industry request to have them. c) As a signal from industry then we can perceive cease of supporting business UDDI registries of big players such as Microsoft, IBM, SAP in January 2006 [2]. There are still Web services (mainly information sources), but I can see the tendency, when major players like Amazon or IBM provide their own Web services (information sources, cloud computing). So there is still few discoverable servicies of similar functionality to make automated and adaptive composition reasonable. d) Web Service Challenge [3] and Semantic Web Service Challenge [4] were aiming in creating sequential composition on the base of input/output matching (even when enriched with ontology-based subsumption relation between parameters). However the idea of service composition is something more then matching interfaces, more composition operators can be used like parallel execution, loops etc. [5] 2. The idea of automatic composition is kind of 'utopia'. a) The SOA is a step forward but still goes along the idea of *re-usability*. When I create my one-machine application, I'm looking for some libraries which I can re-use to avoid re-inventing a wheel. However I'm not assuming in advance that the library will have the API with particular method because searching would result in lots of false negatives. This is because I could not assume the architect of desired library structured his solution in the way I would. And I'm not talking only about interfaces, but also about matching pre-conditions, effects, invariants describing functionality of a component (like in [5]). The similar methodology would problematic when applied in the SOA world. b) This why, as I could see, people are trying to relax conditions and find services which are rather *similar* then *exact* ones; and later on they put some hand-made glue (mediators, connectors) among discovered services. This why general idea of making steadily evolving service taxonomies of UDDI registries [6] leaves some room of flexibility. 3. I can see some similarities to Data Integration domain, where people were very enthusiastic about making fully automated systems for discovering 100% sure mappings between data structures (e.g. tables from two RDBs) but then they shifted their focus on semi-automatic mapping: proposing efficient/effective heuristics, leggible GUI for presentation mapping suggestions etc. Is it the similar tendency in service composition ? Are there e.g. BPEL composition tools that suggests which services match to each other and to our requirements ? Of course with relational data it is easier, because there's lots of them on the net. So, what's going on in this domain ?? What are the problems to be worth of research focus and make small steps in the direction of sth real ? Thank you for your time, Maciej Gawinecki --------------------- http://www.ibspan.waw.pl/~gawinec 1. "Evaluation of Semantic Service Discovery -- A Survey and Directions for Future Research" http://hnsp.inf-bb.uni-jena.de/DIANE/docs/2007_ECOWS_WEWST_slides.pdf 2. http://www.infoworld.com/article/05/12/16/HNuddishut_1.html 3. Web Service Challenge, http://www.ws-challenge.org 4. Main Page - SWS Challenge Wiki, http://sws-challenge.org 5. Contract-based Web Service Composition http://www.edoc.hu-berlin.de/docviews/abstract.php?lang=ger&id=27321 6. The Tao of e-business services http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/library/ws-tao/
Received on Thursday, 24 July 2008 23:02:45 UTC