Fw: Commercial/Real-world Semantic Web Services?

["Jeffrey A. Estefan" <jeffrey.a.estefan@jpl.nasa.gov>]

Team,

Passing this along as an FYI since we're about to embark on the Service 
Description model.

 - J

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Xuan Shi" <Xuan.Shi@mail.wvu.edu>
To: "Minsu Jang" <minsu.jang@gmail.com>; "Ed Addison" <ed@teradisc.org>
Cc: <public-rif-wg@w3.org>; <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>; 
<public-sws-ig@w3.org>
Sent: Monday, October 09, 2006 8:53 PM
Subject: Re: Commercial/Real-world Semantic Web Services?


>
> I agree, semantic Web services (SWS) and this IG have nothing to boast,
> as I indicated in
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sws-ig/2006Sep/0018.html
>
> By examining W3C documentation "Web Services Architecture" again @
> http://www.w3.org/TR/ws-arch/ we can see why SWS failed and had
> little accomplishment and progress in the past years.
>
> How to realize and implement (semantic) Web services? W3C said clearly:
> "the requester and provider entities must agree on the semantics and the
> service description that will govern the interaction between the
> requester and provider agents, but it would be more accurate to say that
> they simply need to have a congruent or non-conflicting view of the
> semantics and service description of the interaction."
>
> (Semantic) Web Services Architecture has to be based on "agreement" -
> if anyone in this SWS-IG would like to read this document again, just
> count the number of the repeated word "agree" used in this W3C
> document.
>
> However, the leading roles of this IG believed that NOBODY wants to
> agree with each other, as every developer or service provider has the
> absolute right to do what s/he wants to do. For this reason, they have
> to use varied kind of logical modeling to guess which one might be
> similar to the others, by referencing each individual annotated semantic
> definition to a super-ontology.
>
> Unfortunately, ontology, again by definition, is a shared, common
> conceptualization of a domain knowledge (or again a kind of
> agreement/standard). Then we see, those who CANNOT reach an "agreement"
> have to "share" a super-ontology. This means, after turning around and
> around through modeling, we return to the starting point - we have to
> "agree" something first. But the problem is, referencing to a
> super-ontology promotes the dissemination of individual "semantic"
> definition on varied service and interface, and this means such people
> just do NOT use that "shared" ontology of a domain of the service.
>
> Why people do NOT use that "shared" super-ontology of a domain of the
> service, in case there is such a super-ontology? Because they thought
> standard/agreement-based SWS "takes all the fun out of it", although
> they knew "That's certainly true" - "given enough clear information
> about web services", we can write any desired program for interacting
> with web services, because we reach an agreement first, then those
> artificially designed "agents" know what and how to do with little fun.
>
> Regards,
>
> Xuan
>
>
>>>> "Ed Addison" <ed@teradisc.org> 10/9/2006 1:13 PM >>>
> I would suggest that those commercial applications that use semantic
> web, or
> semantic web-like technology would not necessarily advertise that
> that's
> what they are doing.  The semantic web is a tool, not a product or
> market.
> SInce the semantic web is in its infancy, commercial applications that
> do
> use semantic web technology most likely use a significantly scoped
> down
> subset of it.  The semantic web is more likely to slowly infiltrate
> various
> information products and web services rather than suddenly get
> commercial
> adoption.  Might be tough to find or even classify the cases for your
> study.  Good luck.
>
>
>
> On 10/8/06, Minsu Jang <minsu.jang@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Deal all,
>>
>> I'm doing a case study on commercial or real-world semantic web
> services.
>> I've done a significant amount of searches on google, but could not
> find
>> any evidence of semantic web services deployed for real-world
> services.
>> Could anybody shed some light on me of where the semantic web
> services
>> in the real world is going? Any URLs or references would be greatly
>> appreciated.
>>
>> Best Regards,
>> zebehn
>>
>> PS: i'm sorry for cross-posting.
>>
>
>
>
> -- 
>
> Ed Addison
> 910-616-7327
>
> .......Think Big !!
>