OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

semantic-ex message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: CEFRIEL's comment to SAWSDL


Dear Michal, Mick and SEE TC members,

I've read the two documents provided by SAWSDL WG. The work is surely
well done (especially the Usage Guide), but if you look at it from an
industrial perspective it appears the WG is trying to move complexity
away: the entire specification is about adding three attribute to wsdl
(modelReference, liftingSchemaMapping, loweringSchemaMapping) and
opening up a world of semantic magic. 
However as soon as you start reading it, you understand that the magic
(as always) is nowhere to be found. The modelReference attribute itself
is just a pointer useful for discovery, but lowering and lifting
operations are very complex and should be described using very difficult
declarative languages (I've being teaching XSLT to industries for 4 yeas
and I can tell you that they are not well accepted, especially if you're
doing XML2XML mappings). 

I suggest to be honest and to explicitly say that some groundingMachine
has to be developed and it will be a pretty complex piece of software
that could (not should) be feed with declarative descriptions (XLT,
SPARQL, etc.) of the lowering and lifting operations.

Moreover, the behavioural annotation is under specified; it leaves to
many options open for describing the Choreography of the Web Service. I
believe that I understand that the WG mean Web Service Choreography when
it writes "specify behavioral aspects", but I wonder what a standard
reader will understand by behavioural annotations. 

Here what I read between the rows. The WG have already agreed on a
solution for the discovery and grounding problem, thus it provides a
complete solution that identifies concepts and provides a way for
lifting and lowering. On the other, The WG hasn't reach an agreement in
describing behaviours yet, thus it just embeds in the written
description that some behavioural aspects may be captured, but the WG
hasn't agreed yet.

I suggest to remove this reference to behavioural aspects and to plan a
revision of the draft in a second stage that will really take into
consideration the behavioural aspects.

Please find attached the Semantic Annotations for WSDL document with my
comments in-line.

HTH

Emanuele

--
Emanuele Della Valle
CEFRIEL - Politecnico di Milano
Via Fucini, 2 * 20133 Milano (Italy)
p. +39 0223954324 e. dellavalle@cefriel.it
f. +39 0223954524 w. http://swa.cefriel.it/
http://www.linkedin.com/in/emanueledellavalle

Semantic Annotations for WSDL_CEFRIEL-comments.doc



[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]