Re: Semantics goal

>>
>> To support the automatic use of web services semantics is critical:
>>
>> D-AG009 Semantics
>>   The web services architecture must support the capability
>> for an agent  to make an ad hoc choice of the right web service.
>
> I guess I see this as out of scope for the first iteration of the WSA.  
> We
> have enough near-term problems to sort out without wrestling with the 
> ones
> over the horizon.

Well there is an opportunity here; one that goes to the heart of the 
entire enterprise.

The reason for web services -- as opposed to simply using Internet 
Exploder -- is that a machine oriented interface is ultimately very 
powerful for automation; in this case automated use of the web.

One of the most powerful motivations for using the Internet at all is 
that people can make late choices, and that they can use the web to find 
what they need as well as do what they need to do. Otherwise, why isn't 
everyone doing UUCP?

What's true for people, is also true for their programs; giving up on 
this goal is tantamount to going back to the LAN/Intranet way of doing 
business. We might do that, but it would represent an enormous wasted 
opportunity.



>
>> Critical Success Factors for this goal:
>>
>> D-AC024, D-AC025, D-AC026
>>
>> D-AC026 ensures that a web service is properly characterized
>> so that its  semantics is clear to an automatic agent.
>
> At the risk of repeating my favorite sermon, if we do our job right, 
> and the
> Semantics people achieve their objectives, this will Just Happen.  We 
> can't
> worry too much about this other than to be aware of and ready to 
> exploit any
> significant breakthroughs in the area of machine-understandable 
> semantics of
> web services.  We can't tie the future of the WSA to this (unlikely, in 
> the
> opinion of many) contingency.


Unfortunately, this is simply not true. We cannot simply `trust' the 
semantic web folks to do their jobs right and solve our problems.


>
>> D-AC026.1 The Web Services Architecture should be aligned, where
>> appropriate and possible with the Semantic Web. This may require some
>> modification of current technology choices.
>
> To  steal once again from Monty Python, that issue has fallen off the 
> twig
> and gone to join the bleedin' choir invisible!  Let's not try to 
> resurrect
> it, please?

I didn't notice it fall off. Maybe I missed something?
>

Received on Friday, 28 June 2002 16:12:05 UTC