- From: Dickinson, Ian J <Ian_Dickinson@hp.com>
- Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 15:55:15 -0000
- To: "'Drew McDermott'" <drew.mcdermott@yale.edu>
- Cc: www-ws@w3c.org
Drew, Thanks for your reply. It has helped me sharpen a vague concern I had about the use of names in DAML-S into an actual question :-) > From: Drew McDermott [mailto:drew.mcdermott@yale.edu] > The other [question -ijd] is, > how (or where) are actual services described. This is more a job for > the Service and Profile parts of DAML-S. Here are the basic > declarations: > > <rdfs:Class rdf:ID="Service"> > <rdfs:label>Service</rdfs:label> > <rdfs:comment>Top Level Service</rdfs:comment> > </rdfs:Class> > > <rdfs:Class rdf:ID="ServiceProvider"> > <rdfs:label>ServiceProvider</rdfs:label> > <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="#Actor" /> > <rdfs:comment> > ServiceProvider provides general contract details such > as address, fax etc. > </rdfs:comment> > </rdfs:Class> > > You would instantiate a particular Service by writing > > <daml-s:Service ID="CokesForNickels"/> This seems somewhat inconsistent with the examples, and the discussion in the June archive [1]. From those sources, I would have expected you to write something like: <daml:Class ID="CokesForNickels"> <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="&damls;#Service" /> </daml:Class> According to the rationale document that David referenced in his reply, services are classes and an instantiation of that service is an interaction. So, I instantiate a CokesForNickels instance, give it an input nickel and expect an output coke. Given that, what I don't understand is how I differentiate between the following three things: * the concept or specification of machines (services) that give cokes for nickels, * the coke-vending machine here on the top floor of our lab (as opposed to the one on the middle floor), and * the act of getting a coke from the top floor coke machine. I guess, naively, I was anticipating a data model in which coke machines were DAML classes, a given coke machine was an instance (with a URI to distinguish the top floor machine from the middle floor) and each interaction was an instance of a grounding. But the service ontology as written doesn't seem to allow me to distinguish all three of these cases. Does that make sense? How does DAML-S distinguish types of services from identified individual services? Cheers, Ian [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws/2001Jun/0001.html _______________________________________________________________________ Ian J. Dickinson HP Labs, Bristol, UK mailto:Ian_Dickinson@hp.com
Received on Wednesday, 28 November 2001 10:55:42 UTC