- From: Booth, David (HP Software - Boston) <dbooth@hp.com>
- Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 18:18:22 -0500
- To: "Jacek Kopecky" <jacek.kopecky@deri.org>
- Cc: "WS-Description WG" <www-ws-desc@w3.org>, "Bijan Parsia" <bparsia@isr.umd.edu>
> -----Original Message----- > From: Jacek Kopecky [mailto:jacek.kopecky@deri.org] > > David, > > thanks a lot for the review, I'll try to address all your > comments soon. So far only on the general comments, please > see below. 8-) > > On Thu, 2005-12-22 at 15:46 -0500, Booth, David (HP Software - Boston) > wrote: > > Document reviewed: "Web Services Description Language (WSDL) Version > > 2.0: RDF Mapping" http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-wsdl20-rdf-20051104/ > > > > GENERAL COMMENTS > > The document thus far only describes the ontology that will be used > > for the resulting RDF. The mapping itself is still marked as a "to > > do", so I cannot comment on that. I wonder: Will the mapping be > > defined in XSLT? That would be really convenient if it is > > feasible. And if not, I am curious to know why not, since the need > > to map from the XML world to the RDF world is likely to be > > increasingly common. > > We intend to have the mapping from the component model to > RDF, not directly from the XML. Oh. How would that work? Given a WSDL 2.0 document, what would I do to produce the corresponding RDF? It sounds like you are saying that there would be two mappings, A and B, and you will be doing mapping B: A B WSDL 2.0 document -----> WSDL 2.0 component model -----> RDF Is that what you mean? > But at least I am planning to > create an XSLT transformation as one implementation of this, > so if it looks correct and complete, it might also become a > part of the spec itself. Cool. David Booth
Received on Tuesday, 3 January 2006 23:22:11 UTC