Ontolog Forum Scheduled Discussion http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ConferenceCall_2005_10_20 : Ontolog Forum Scheduled Discussion http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ConferenceCall_2005_10_20 Semantic Web Service Ontology Standards
October 20, 2005
Nicolas Rouquette, NASA/JPL
mailto:nicolas.rouquette@jpl.nasa.gov This work was performed for the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, sponsored by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not constitute or imply its endorsement by the United States Government, the (name of contractor), or the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology.
Web Services: Practical yet? : Web Services: Practical yet? Standards have been evolving quickly & maturing impressively…
http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~horrocks/Publications/download/2005/HPPH05.pdf
Tim Berners-Lee’s
“semantic web stack”
(2003 version) …success increases demand
for more features… (2005 version) …standards allow Computer
Scientists to scrutinize for bugs… …but the cleaned up version
Isn’t a standard (yet) - Which stack?
- How sturdy?
- Will it last
long enough
to get ROI? DLP
Are Semantic Web Services & Pragmatism Compatible In The Same Context ? : Are Semantic Web Services & Pragmatism Compatible In The Same Context ? “The Practical Programmer” (Hunt, Thomas)
Bend or Break (ch. 5)
Accomodating “change” requires two things:
flexibility (e.g. for reusability and robustness to changes)
reversibility (e.g. for adaptability w.r.t. changing past decisions)
Pragmatic recommendation: decoupling !
Data model (~ ontology for describing a “web service”)
Views on that model (e.g., matching, advertising, negotiating..)
Are Semantic Web Services pragmatically sensible?
Efficiency Concerns - volatility of standards & rework
Risk Concerns - bleeding-edge technology & critical factors
Impressive Achievements & Progress are Increasingly Hard to Ignore : Impressive Achievements & Progress are Increasingly Hard to Ignore Application success stories & poster childs
Early adopters: Bioinformatics & Medecine
More next month: http://iswc2005.semanticweb.org
For the pragmatists among us who can’t go to Ireland…
Step2: Ok, I got the stack…
- What infrastructure can this stack run on? Step1: Ok, let’s play semantic web services…
- Which stack do I use? DLP Step3: Ok, I got the stack & the infrastructure…
What tools do I use?
What problems can I tackle with all of this? http://www.globalgridforum.org/
http://taverna.sourceforge.net
http://www.servicemix.org
http://www.alphaworks.ibm.com/grid
http://www.alphaworks.ibm.com/tech/ettkws
(examples for informative purposes only) Today’s discussion will be
an overview of 4 approaches:
OWL-S, WSMO, WSDL-S, SWSF
Connection with JPL, NASA & the broader Space Community : Connection with JPL, NASA & the broader Space Community Space missions have complex Architectures
Complexity due to distribution across space, time, organizations, objectives… From: RASDS, CCSDS 311x0-M-1 Without the “web”, this looks like a “semantic service” architecture…
Is a “semantic web service” description a view on the architecture of that system?
From the IEEE-1471-2000 conceptual framework… : From the IEEE-1471-2000 conceptual framework… IEEE-1471-2000 provides recommendations only… RM-ODP formalizes these concepts…
http://www.lcc.uma.es/~av/RM-ODP/ These concepts are useful to describe what a space mission is…
Space Data System Several Architectural Viewpoints : Space Data System Several Architectural Viewpoints Derived from: RM-ODP, ISO 10746
Compliant with IEEE 1471 RM-ODP viewpoints = A mechanism for dealing with the complexity of distributed systems Viewpoints from the “Reference Architecture
For Space-Data Systems” (a CCSDS draft standard)
ODP & Semantic Web Services = A sensible combination : ODP & Semantic Web Services = A sensible combination http://www.lcc.uma.es/~av/RM-ODP/Presentations/ISOIEC19793UML4ODPspecv08.pdf
Architecture, Web Services & Semantics What makes this a potent mix of ideas? : Architecture, Web Services & Semantics What makes this a potent mix of ideas? Barry Smith (October 13, 2005)
How to Do Things with Paper: The Ontology of Documents and the Technologies of Identification
http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ConferenceCall_2005_10_13
A summary of missing things from existing document ontologies…
The significance of documents in society & institutions (deontic powers)
The social interactions in which documents play an essential role
Document as (1) stand-alone entity vs. (2) something with proxy & remote attachments
…(many more)
Relationship to practical issues of ontology development
OntoClean’s meta-properties = Identity, Unity, Rigidity, ….
Relationship to web services (a context of social interactions)
Document roles as process inputs & outputs vs. messages (e.g., FLOWS )
Relationship to open-distributed processing (a larger social interaction milieu)
Service description as a document (is it allegorical? autographical?) Distinguish scientific interest … (e.g., philosophy, theoretical computer science, mathematics)
From engineering pragmatism… (e.g, the wisdom required to make informed technology choices)
This is a discussion about the latter
Today’s discussion : Today’s discussion Standards are evolving rapidly
OWL-S 1.1 => 1.2
WSDL-1.0 => 2.0
…
Semantic Web Services & Pragmatism
Practical approaches (e.g., tool-support)
OWL-S (incl. CMU’s), WSMO, WSDL-S
Examples of salient differences & key concepts important to understand
(Plain) Web Services = WSDL or ???
(Process semantics) = OWL-S or WSDL-S or FLOWS (from SWSF) or ???
(Practical reasoning) = with semantics (e.g ROWS from SWSF) or without ?
Today’s discussion focuses on a (limited) selection
What are the 4 most important topics to be aware of, how do they relate?
A Distinguished Panel of Experts : A Distinguished Panel of Experts OWL-S by David Martin
Senior Computer Scientist at SRI International
WSMO by John Domingue
Deputy Director of the Knowledge Media Institute
WSDL-S by Amith Sheth
Professor of Computer Science, U. of Georgia
SWSF by Michael Gruninger
Research Scientist, U. of Toronto
Each topic will be discussed in a 20 minute period
A presentation by the lead panelist (~ 10 minutes)
Questions, answers & discussion (~ 10 minutes)
A cross-topic discussions, questions/answers at the end