[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Fw: DAML-S and UDDI
----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeff Lansing" <jeff@polexis.com> To: <www-ws@w3c.org> Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2003 1:23 PM Subject: DAML-S and UDDI > > "Delivering Semantic Web Services" [1] presents the problem of > distinguishing a US-based service for weather data from a service for > US-area weather data: > > "The problem of UDDI is that it does not have an explicit representation > of what the Web Service does. Therefore, the search for a Web Service > with a given capability becomes very difficult. As an example, to locate > a Web Service that reports weather information within the US, a > requester may look for all the Web Services that contain a TModel > associated with a classification of services such as NAICS [18] which > are specified as weather providers, and all the Web Services > descriptions that contain a TModel that associate the Web Service with > the US, and then look in the intersection of the results of the two > searches. The problem of course is that this type of search cannot > distinguish between weather services that provide information about the > US, from US based weather services that may provide information about > the weather in other countries. Overall, because UDDI misses any form of > capability representation and capability matching, it is extremely > difficult to find Web Services with a desired capability using UDDI." > > It is strongly suggested in [1] that DAML-S can solve this problem. It > is perhaps even suggested (because [1] references [2]) that representing > DAML-S profile information in UDDI is intimately involved in the way > that DAML-S solves this problem. But in fact [1] does not actually say > how to solve this problem. Is that because the solution is so obvious? > Let's see. > > Obviously this problem could be solved if we could distinguish > qualifiers on the service from qualifiers on the output of the service. > > One way to add qualifiers to a service in UDDI is to add keyedReferences > to the CategoryBag of the service; these keyedReferences can then > qualify the service by associating it with "positions" in a > classification. (So, e.g., this could qualify a service as a weather > service.) > > In [2] it is suggested to add additional keyedReferences for the > attributes in the DAML-S profile, to the CategoryBag of a service. For > example: > > KeyedReference > KeyName= Output > KeyValue= phenomenologyOntology:weather > TModelKey= "UUID of the DAML-S Output TModel" > > might be added for the example. But this still doesn't solve the > problem, because it doesn't actually qualify the output, as to its > geographic region. So something is still missing. > > Perhaps the "DAML-S Output TModel" also needs to have keyedReferences > that qualify it, in the way that a service does? Is that the solution? > > Jeff > > > [1] > http://www.ri.cmu.edu/pub_files/pub4/paolucci_massimo_2003_1/paolucci_massim o_2003_1.pdf > [2] http://eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/archive/00007778/ >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]