[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [soa-rm] Re: Autonomous Services?
Ken: Could I infer from this that an ontology goes further than a mere data dictionary in that it not only defines the terms but also captures the associations between them. Certain ontologies like SUMO have done a wonderful job IMO defining the first order logic and primitives that are used to classify associations. Duane Ken Laskey wrote: > I've struggled for a long time on what it means to capture semantics, > for example why is an OWL ontology better than a data dictionary. My > conclusion (so far) is that conveying semantics (or just pedestrian > meaning) is describing enough about a thing (physical or conceptual) > that one builds a common picture with someone else. Conveying > semantics depends on having some degree of a common framework and > then describing the new entity in terms of/as extensions to that > framework. You add more bits of information until the two have a > sufficiently common picture for the task at hand. A simpler task may > be satisfied by a smaller, simpler set of descriptive elements while > something requiring more precision will require more detail. The > language used to capture the description has to be sufficiently > expressive to capture the information that discriminates entities or > shows their commonality. OWL does a great job on things that can be > described in terms of sets while its current form does nothing to > express uncertainty. "Storing" semantics is then storing these > descriptive elements in a usable, retrievable fashion. > > Not sure that is a sufficient explanation (i.e. that I have been able > to create a sufficiently common picture) but it's all I've got now. > > Ken > > On May 2, 2005, at 12:44 PM, Frank 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 >>> *********** >>> >>> >> >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > ------------------ > Ken Laskey > MITRE Corporation, M/S H305 phone: 703-983-7934 > 7515 Colshire Drive fax: 703-983-1379 > McLean VA 22102-7508 > > -- *********** Senior Standards Strategist - Adobe Systems, Inc. - http://www.adobe.com Chair - OASIS Service Oriented Architecture Reference Model Technical Committee - http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=soa-rm 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]