>Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 13:03:19 -0600
>From: "Ed Dodds" <dodds@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [ontolog-forum] Re: WSRF and OWL-S ?
>To: "'[ontolog-forum] '" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>Saw the following post elseplace and was wondering if anyone here could add
>insight?
>
>Ed Dodds
>
>
>From: David De Roure <dder@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Add To Address Book
>Subject: Re: WSRF and OWL-S ?
>To: Paul Libbrecht <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Cc: Chiusano Joseph <chiusano_joseph@xxxxxxx>, public-sws-ig
><public-sws-ig@xxxxxx>
>
>Thanks for this.
>
>I would also be interested in people's views and experience of the
>orthogonality of these things. WSRF grew from OGSI, which attracted
>much discussion over its so-called "stateful services" - some saw
>these as denying some of the benefits of the web services model. In
>WSRF there was a shift to a resource perspective in which services
>provide access to state. One question is, does this state issue have
>any impact at all on the use of OWL-S (e.g. in describing service
>composition), or are these things orthogonal as suggested? I believe
>that in principle WSRF services can be described with sufficient
>expressivity in OWL-S, but it would be interesting to see someone
>apply OWL-S to some "real" WSRF services in order to get some insight
>into this in an application context.
>
>Thanks
>
>-- Dave
>
>On Thu, 23 Dec 2004, Paul Libbrecht wrote:
>
>> Cool,
>>
>> I can only agree with this relationship situation.
>> It says:
>> In this sense, OWL-S is complementary to both these specifications.
>> which can be sort of viewed. Except, the complementarity has just not
>> been ever experimented with thus far, or ?
>>
>> paul
>>
>>
>>
>> Le 23 déc. 04, à 15:41, Chiusano Joseph a écrit :
>>
>> >
>> > This is a late reply to the original Nov 19 posting beow, as there is
>> > new information available regarding the original question of "WSRF and
>> > OWL-S", since the original posting. See [1], an excerpt from "OWL-S'
>> > Relationship to Selected Other Technologies".
>> >
>> > [1] http://www.daml.org/services/owl-s/1.1/related.html#grid
>> >
>> > Kind Regards,
>> > Joseph Chiusano
>> > Booz Allen Hamilton
>> > Strategy and Technology Consultants to the World
>> >
>> >
>> >> -----Original Message-----
>> >> From: public-sws-ig-request@xxxxxx
>> >> [mailto:public-sws-ig-request@xxxxxx] On Behalf Of David De Roure
>> >> Sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 7:08 PM
>> >> To: Paul Libbrecht
>> >> Cc: public-sws-ig
>> >> Subject: Re: WSRF and OWL-S ?
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Paul
>> >>
>> >> This is a really interesting question!
>> >>
>> >> I'm not going to try to answer it, just expand on I think why
>> >> it's interesting and important... )
>> >>
>> >> WSRF is based on the concepts of the Open Grid Services
>> >> Infrastructure, designed to address the requirements of Grid
>> >> middleware. It is anticipated to represent the convergence
>> >> of the Web service and Grid computing communities.
>> >>
>> >> There is (some of us believe) a very strong case for the
>> >> application of Semantic Web Services in Grid middleware. In
>> >> fact this was a subject of a discussion at the IST2004
>> >> conference this week in the Hague. This is part of the
>> >> Semantic Grid vision (www.semanticgrid.org)
>> >>
>> >> Which therefore begs a question along the lines you ask; i.e.
>> >> how well suited are SWS technologies (OWL-S, WSMO...) to the
>> >> description of Grid services (as in WSRF) - what we might
>> >> call "Semantic Grid Services".
>> >>
>> >> Some of the deployments of SWS in grid computing have
>> >> consisted of subsets of OWL-S applied in Web-services based
>> >> solutions. I was conjecturing earlier this week that there
>> >> are aspects of WSMO which, on the surface at least, suggest
>> >> it may be well suited to some Grid computing scenarios (for
>> >> example, separation of business logic).
>> >>
>> >> So, as you say, it would be really interesting to know if
>> >> anyone is applying semantic web services to grid services
>> >> along the lines of WSRF.
>> >> In fact it would be interesting to know what people think the
>> >> issues are.
>> >>
>> >> It should be possible to find some use cases.
>> >>
>> >> Thanks
>> >>
>> >> -- Dave
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, 19 Nov 2004, Paul Libbrecht wrote:
>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Hi,
>> >>>
>> >>> I recently discovered WSRF, the Web-Service Resource Framework
>> >>> http://www.globus.org/wsrf/
>> >>> and I have to say that it looks nice.
>> >>> I was wonder wether anyone of you has been working making semantic
>> >>> web-services stateful like this specification makes general
>> >>> web-services stateful.
>> >>>
>> >>> Actually, it may be that these recommendations are
>> >> orthogonal, but I
>> >>> couldn't be sure of this, yet.
>> >>>
>> >>> paul
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
>Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-
forum/
>Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
>Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
>To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Config:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (01)
|