ontolog-forum
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Modeling Ontology

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Peter Yim <peter.yim@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2005 18:19:20 -0700
Message-id: <42B0D398.3030907@xxxxxxxx>
It would really be nice to have you at the "Service Sciences" 
technical discussion session. Any chance you can call in (for the 
2 hours) even when you are on the road, Duane?    (01)

=ppy
--    (02)

Duane Nickull wrote Wed, 15 Jun 2005 17:57:32 -0700:
> Peter:
> 
> I will be on tomorrow but absent from the next two due to travel 
> (Geneva, Java One).  Anyone else going to Java One June 27-30?
> 
> Duane    (03)


> Peter Yim wrote:
> 
>> Our scheduled Technical Discussion for Thu 2005.06.30, moderated by 
>> Bill McCarthy, is on the subject of "Service Sciences". That would be 
>> an ideal platform to "discuss" this - WSMO & SWSF - if someone 
>> attending the session can talk about it intelligently. Timing-wise, it 
>> may be too soon, though.
>>
>> Do we have anyone who can do that, and is planning to come to the 6/30 
>> session? Any suggestion?
>>
>> =ppy
>>
>> P.S. ... just helping keep track of the acronyms:
>>
>> WSMO = Web Service Modeling Ontology - 
>> http://www.w3.org/Submission/2005/SUBM-WSMO-20050603/
>> http://www.w3.org/2005/04/FSWS/Submissions/1/wsmo_v10.pdf
>>
>> SWSF = Semantic Web Services Framework - 
>> http://www.daml.org/services/swsf/1.0/overview/
>> -- 
>>
>>
>> Nicolas F Rouquette wrote Wed, 15 Jun 2005 16:57:35 -0700:
>>
>>> It might be good to have a planning discussion about this.
>>>
>>> There could be 3 options:
>>>
>>> 1) presentation of WSMO
>>>
>>> 2) presentation of SWSF
>>>
>>> 3) the practical and strategic aspects of using WSMO and/or SWSF, for 
>>> what, when, etc...
>>>
>>> Personally, 1) + 2) would be a weak approximation of the concerns 
>>> that arise w.r.t. 3), the "real" issue.
>>> As I menitioned earlier, if you read some of the fine print in the 
>>> WSMO and SWSF docs, there is
>>> important wisdom and caution that the people behind the spec believe 
>>> is important enough to
>>> mention explicitly in these specs. However, it is difficult for 
>>> non-experts to have enough depth
>>> about these related specs to make heads & tails of these bits and 
>>> pieces of wisdom to go through
>>> a checklist of questions/answers to decide which of these approaches 
>>> is better suited to a given problem.
>>>
>>> I'm not saying we can expect magic answers but we could start to ask 
>>> the folks in WSMO and SWSF
>>> to help us organize  a discussion where we could start a simple 
>>> checklist of, say, the top ten questions
>>> they would advise/recommend practitioners to think about in choosing 
>>> one vs. the other and some kind
>>> of illustration/example to get an intuitive feel to relate these 
>>> questions to someone's own concerns/project/task/work...
>>>
>>> -- Nicolas.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> Duane Nickull wrote:
>>>
>>>> Thank you Peter, Nicolas.
>>>>
>>>> M. Yim, would you consider placing an subject on our next agenda to 
>>>> discuss a possible invitation to the gentlemen below to present to 
>>>> our Group?
>>>>
>>>> Duane
>>>
>>>
>>
>>>> Peter F Brown wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Duane:
>>>>> WSMO was presented in detail last week at the W3 semantic web services
>>>>> workshop in Innsbruck, Austria - WSMO's "home base", as it is largely
>>>>> promoted by the Innsbruck-based Digital Enterprise Research Institute
>>>>> (DERI), with considerable support from the European Commission.
>>>>>
>>>>> There is some concern about the pressure being mounted by DERI to 
>>>>> have WSMO
>>>>> "adopted as a standard" (although not clear by whom: W3C?). The 
>>>>> European
>>>>> Commission will be looking at this over the coming months.
>>>>>
>>>>> There is a good overview of WSMO at:
>>>>> http://www.w3.org/2005/04/FSWS/Submissions/1/wsmo_v10.pdf used at the
>>>>> workshop. It might be worth contacting John Domingue from the UK Open
>>>>> University, who made the presentation, and with whom I had a couple 
>>>>> of bried
>>>>> talks during the activity.
>>>>>
>>>>> -Peter
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>> [mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Duane 
>>>>> Nickull
>>>>> Sent: 11 June 2005 01:18
>>>>> To: [ontolog-forum]
>>>>> Subject: [ontolog-forum] Modeling Ontology
>>>>>
>>>>> Anyone have any comments or thoughts on this:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.w3.org/Submission/2005/SUBM-WSMO-20050603/
>>>>>
>>>>> Might be an idea to extend an invite for a presentation.
>>>>>
>>>>> Duane Nickull
>>>>
>>>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> 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
> 
> 
_________________________________________________________________
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    (04)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>