[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Semantics (was: Re: [soa-rm] Re: Autonomous Services?)
Frank: I just skimmed this work and find it very interesting. There are a couple of sections we may wish to ponder in our context. Section 1.1 - definitions. Clean separation of the Semantic Model (probably what also may be termed ontology) from the concept of semantics itself. There is also another separation of semantics annotation (where something like UDEF would be categorized) from the notion itself. Section 1.2 - a great depiction of how semantics relate to Data Model. page 15-16 - I do not see how this XSL instance to OWL mapping: <xsl:template match="/"> <Address rdf:ID="Address1"> <has_Receiver rdf:datatype="xs:string"> <xsl:value-of select="POAddress/recepientInstName"/> <has_StreetAddress rdf:datatype="xs:string"> <xsl:value-of select="concat(POAddress/streetAddr1,POAddress/streetAddr2)"/> </has_StreetAddress > <has_City rdf:datatype="xs:string"> <xsl:value-of select="POAddress/city"/> </has_City> <has_State rdf:datatype="xs:string"> <xsl:value-of select="POAddress/state"/> </has_State> <has_ZipCode rdf:datatype="xs:string"> <xsl:value-of select="POAddress/zipCode"/> </has_ZipCode> <has_Country rdf:datatype="xs:string"> <xsl:value-of select="POAddress/country"/> </has_Country> </Address> </xsl:template> varies from what a schema can tell you. The basic premise of containership structure allows the same declarations IMO. I did like the aspect of context specific semantic reference however. The aspect of context is missing from many semantics works. An example - you define something called "party". Seems easy - a party is an entity assuming a role within an exchange (or something similar to that). The gotcha is in the implementation. The semantics of "Party" varies from itself within different hierarchic manifestations. //PO/Buyer/Party != //PO/Seller/Party This is potentially a bad example since it could be solved with ambiguous references but the main notion is that every element has at least one context qualified. Luckily, we do not have to address a solution for this but I hope these folks can. It looks like their xpath statement to OWL grammar works conceptually. Duane Francis McCabe wrote: > +1 > In fact, I am hard put to understand how you can *store* semantics. > You can only store data. The best that you can do is store a > description of the semantics; but that is not the same thing. > > On that theme, IBM and others at the U of Georgia recently released a > paper on semantic annotations of Web services. Have not yet had the > time to digest this properly, but could be interesting... if IBM > makes a play in the standards space with this. > > The link to the paper is: > > http://www.alphaworks.ibm.com/g/g.nsf/img/semanticsdocs/$file/ > wssemantic_annotation.pdf > > Frank > > > On May 2, 2005, at 9:30 AM, Duane Nickull wrote: > >> John >> (aka "Meggan". Hey - how you dress in private is none of our >> business ;-) >> >> Just joking!! >> >> This is a good question. >> >> The registry is one way that one could store semantics however >> semantics are not required to be explicit and there are other models >> for sharing information beside registry. At the abstract level it >> represents a facet of the model where the information available is >> meaningful. Therefore, a registry will not be in the reference >> model as a normative, core element. >> >> We decided to add a non normative section to explain some of these >> manifestations. How one goes from "Data Model" to Messages, >> Availability to Registry, Policy to on the wire security etc. >> >> It would be great if you could hook up with the person with this >> section and offer proof reading services. Value your input. >> >> Duane >> >> >> >> >> meggan hardin wrote: >> >> >>> My assumptions (so far) about the central metadata concepts have >>> been that the reg/rep holds this data. Are we delving to the level >>> of defining specific types of resources / components that should be >>> included in a major component such as the reg/rep? I think that the >>> concept of storing semantic metadata as an independent integration >>> reference point is important enough to be included in the RM. >>> >>> FWIW - Contivo terms the semantic metadata repository the >>> "enterprise vocabulary"... >>> >>> john >>> >>> Smith, Martin wrote: >>> >>> >>>> Violent agreement. >>>> martin >>>> ________________________________ >>>> >>>> From: Schuldt, Ron L [mailto:ron.l.schuldt@lmco.com] >>>> Sent: Fri 4/29/2005 6:39 PM >>>> To: Smith, Martin; Sharma, Sameer; Duane Nickull; >>>> john@crossconnections.ws >>>> Cc: ebSOA OASIS TC; soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org >>>> Subject: RE: [soa-rm] Re: Autonomous Services? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Sameer will correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that his intent >>>> was >>>> to include the notion of central metadata within a "Reference >>>> Architecture" not the Reference Model. Appendix B is the place where >>>> example use cases would be defined. I suspect that Sameer might be >>>> willing to submit an example use case. >>>> >>>> Ron Schuldt >>>> Senior Staff Systems Architect >>>> Lockheed Martin Enterprise Information Systems >>>> 11757 W. Ken Caryl Ave. >>>> #F521 Mail Point DC5694 >>>> Littleton, CO 80127 >>>> 303-977-1414 >>>> ron.l.schuldt@lmco.com >>>> >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Smith, Martin [mailto:Martin.Smith@DHS.GOV] >>>> Sent: Friday, April 29, 2005 4:19 PM >>>> To: Sharma, Sameer; Duane Nickull; john@crossconnections.ws >>>> Cc: ebSOA OASIS TC; soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org >>>> Subject: RE: [soa-rm] Re: Autonomous Services? >>>> >>>> >>>> Sameer - - >>>> >>>> Let me practice being Matt <g>: >>>> >>>> The term " 'central' metadata" presumes a specific implementation >>>> strategy and should not be in the RM. Perhaps "metadata >>>> associated with >>>> the service should be available in the environment." Now in my >>>> example >>>> SOA for Appendix B, I'll probably show a UDDI services directory, or >>>> maybe a combo registry/repository that can in fact store all the >>>> description metadata. >>>> >>>> Martin >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Sharma, Sameer [mailto:sameer.sharma@lmco.com] >>>> Sent: Friday, April 29, 2005 2:16 PM >>>> To: Smith, Martin; Duane Nickull; john@crossconnections.ws >>>> Cc: ebSOA OASIS TC; soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org >>>> Subject: RE: [soa-rm] Re: Autonomous Services? >>>> >>>> >>>> My feeling is that some of what you are alluding to might be >>>> covered by >>>> UDDI, >>>> however as is happening in an instance of SOA deployment that I am >>>> involved >>>> in - UDDI by itself is not going to be sufficient to express all the >>>> metadata >>>> that is needed for a client to successfully and contextually >>>> interpret >>>> all >>>> that a Web Service does. >>>> >>>> My attempted solution is to capture this additional metadata by >>>> leveraging >>>> central metadata services of my enterprise. I guess what I am >>>> saying is >>>> that >>>> the concept of "central metadata" might be a valid candidate as a >>>> component of >>>> the Reference Architecture we are considering. >>>> >>>> Since I was unable to participate in the F2F, (due to some last >>>> minute >>>> commitments that I got called into), if this topic was discussed, >>>> please >>>> accept my apologies for bringing it up again. >>>> >>>> Thanks! >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> L >>>> Sameer Sharma >>>> Principal Applications Architect >>>> Lockheed Martin Corporation >>>> Chief Technology Office (CTO) >>>> 12506 Lake Underhill Road - MP 166 >>>> Orlando, FL-32825 >>>> Tel: (407) 306 5640 >>>> Fax:(407) 306 1392 >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Smith, Martin [mailto:Martin.Smith@DHS.GOV] >>>> Sent: Friday, April 29, 2005 1:38 PM >>>> To: Duane Nickull; john@crossconnections.ws >>>> Cc: ebSOA OASIS TC; soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org >>>> Subject: RE: [soa-rm] Re: Autonomous Services? >>>> >>>> Folks - - >>>> >>>> On my way home from N'awlins Wed night, I had a thought on this >>>> discussion. >>>> >>>> I think we expect services in an SOA to be independent of the kind of >>>> shared contextual knowledge we usually presume within a local >>>> computing >>>> environment. We expect that the requesting service will be able to >>>> obtain all the info it needs to use the responding service >>>> successfully >>>> by processing the responding service's description metadata. I do >>>> think >>>> this is a core characteristic of SOA services. >>>> >>>> I'm not suggesting we reinstate the use of the word "autonomous" as a >>>> handle for this concept since it demonstrably caused confusion at the >>>> f2f. If we need a handle, perhaps "self-sufficient" or >>>> "self-documenting" or "introspective" (naaah - forget that one.) >>>> >>>> Martin >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Duane Nickull [mailto:dnickull@adobe.com] >>>> Sent: Friday, April 29, 2005 12:43 PM >>>> To: john@crossconnections.ws >>>> Cc: ebSOA OASIS TC; soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org >>>> Subject: [soa-rm] Re: Autonomous Services? >>>> >>>> We discussed and the submitter withdrew the submission pending >>>> clarification on exactly what is meant by Autonomous nature WRT >>>> services. It may be re-submitted and probably will however we do not >>>> have consensus on it at present. >>>> >>>> Duane >>>> >>>> john c hardin wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> Duane and SOA-RM group - >>>>> Can someone enlighten the members of the eb-soa group regarding a >>>>> description of Autonomous Services? Any resulting conversations from >>>>> the meetings this week, on the subject of Autonomous Services >>>>> would be >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> good also. >>>>> >>>>> thanks >>>>> john >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> *********** >>>> Senior Standards Strategist - Adobe Systems, Inc. - http:// >>>> www.adobe.com >>>> Vice Chair - UN/CEFACT Bureau Plenary - http://www.unece.org/cefact/ >>>> Adobe Enterprise Developer Resources - >>>> http://www.adobe.com/enterprise/developer/main.html >>>> *********** >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> -- >> *********** >> Senior Standards Strategist - Adobe Systems, Inc. - http:// >> www.adobe.com >> Vice Chair - UN/CEFACT Bureau Plenary - http://www.unece.org/cefact/ >> Adobe Enterprise Developer Resources - http://www.adobe.com/ >> enterprise/developer/main.html >> *********** >> >> > -- *********** Senior Standards Strategist - Adobe Systems, Inc. - http://www.adobe.com Vice Chair - UN/CEFACT Bureau Plenary - http://www.unece.org/cefact/ Adobe Enterprise Developer Resources - http://www.adobe.com/enterprise/developer/main.html ***********
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]