- From: Katia Sycara <katia@cs.cmu.edu>
- Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 14:28:07 -0500
- To: 'Stephane Fellah' <fellah@pcigeomatics.com>, www-ws-arch@w3.org
- Cc: katia@cs.cmu.edu
Although we cannot force anyone to adopt this ontology, I sincerely hope that folks, not only OWL-S, but others, will adopt it as an upper level ontology for continuing work on Web services. Cheers, Katia -----Original Message----- From: www-ws-arch-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-arch-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Stephane Fellah Sent: Friday, January 30, 2004 11:24 AM To: Katia Sycara; www-ws-arch@w3.org Subject: RE: Web Services Architecture Document This is good news. Can I assume safely that this ontology will be considered as the upper-ontology for the W3C web services architecture, on which other ontologies such as OWL-S should hook in ? Best regards Stephane Fellah Senior Software Engineer PCI Geomatics 490, Boulevard St Joseph Hull, Quebec Canada J8Y 3Y7 Tel: 1 819 770 0022 Ext. 223 Fax 1 819 770 0098 Visit our web site: www.pcigeomatics.com -----Original Message----- From: Katia Sycara [mailto:katia@cs.cmu.edu] Sent: Friday, January 30, 2004 10:52 AM To: Stephane Fellah; www-ws-arch@w3.org Cc: katia@cs.cmu.edu Subject: RE: Web Services Architecture Document Staphane, We are working on an OWL formalization of the concepts and relationships in the Web Services Architecture. It will be published along with the final Working Group product by end of next week. As for OWL-S it is not a Working Group of the W3C, though some of us would like it to become one. Cheers, Katia -----Original Message----- From: www-ws-arch-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-arch-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Stephane Fellah Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2004 5:27 PM To: www-ws-arch@w3.org Subject: Re: Web Services Architecture Document Hi, I have a couple of questions related to the scope of your working group. Is there any chance to see an OWL formalization of the different concepts and relationships exposed in the WS Architecture Document ? What would be the next step for W3C : define again new XML schemas (syntaxic approach) or using semantic web technologies (OWL). I clearly favor the last option because the syntaxic approach is too brittle to scale on the web. The OWL-S effort seems to address the same problem, but uses different terms. Is there any harmonization effort between the working groups ? Thanks in advance. Best regards Stephane Fellah Senior Software Engineer PCI Geomatics 490, Boulevard St Joseph Hull, Quebec Canada J8Y 3Y7 Tel: 1 819 770 0022 Ext. 223 Fax 1 819 770 0098 Visit our web site: www.pcigeomatics.com
Received on Friday, 30 January 2004 14:28:54 UTC