- From: Francis McCabe <fgm@fla.fujitsu.com>
- Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2002 09:20:50 -0700
- To: "Damodaran, Suresh" <Suresh_Damodaran@stercomm.com>
- Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org
- Message-Id: <D40564D0-980E-11D6-8B75-000393A3327C@fla.fujitsu.com>
Suresh: Essentially it boils down to the interactions between entities that are owned by different people. Firstly, note that there is a difference between publicly observable semantics and publicly observed communication. I.e., we are talking about the form of the communication/descriptions etc rather than the actual communicated information. If I may draw an analogy with security here: the encryption algorithm being public benefits all users of the encryption algorithm; and actually makes the communicated text more secure (assuming the algorithm stands up to scrutiny of course). It turns out that if the very method of describing the meaning of a service (or anything else for that matter) relies on unobservable characteristics then you get into a lot of trouble; in particular it becomes impossible to test for compliance. The wording could be clearer; but the intention is to make sure that the principles for any semantic descriptions are set out properly. It isn't necessary to preclude a private agreement; what is necessary is to preclude a private agreement about the forms of messages and descriptions. For example, we might have an out of band agreement that the words yes and no should be swapped in their meaning. If that is not documented then everyone is in trouble, especially you when I renage on our agreement! With a public semantics it makes possible services such as escrow, non-repudiation etc etc. As well as generally oiling the wheels of interactions. BTW, the requirements that come out of this goal should, IMO, primarily result in requirements to the semantic web folks. From our POV we merely need mechanisms to permit the description of services in a clear way, and to provide architectural elements and mechanisms for managing descriptions. Semantics is a critical piece of the overall web services field, simply because of the public nature of the Internet. Frank McCabe On Friday, July 12, 2002, at 04:15 PM, Damodaran, Suresh wrote: > -----Original Message----- > From: Francis McCabe [mailto:fgm@fla.fujitsu.com] > Sent: Friday, July 12, 2002 5:23 PM > To: www-ws-arch@w3.org > Subject: Semantics > > D-AC026.2.3 It must be possible to characterize a service using purely > publicly observable semantics. I.e., the semantic description of a web > service should not rely on private agreements or on unobservable > characteristics of services and agents. > > <sd> Why? </sd> > > Thanks, > > -Suresh > Sterling Commerce > > > > >
Attachments
- text/enriched attachment: stored
Received on Monday, 15 July 2002 12:20:58 UTC