From: Sheila McIlraith (sam@ksl.stanford.edu)
Date: 06/11/01
Terry, I agree with your comments. One thing I'd also like to pursue is or re-investigate is the tighter coupling of inputs/preconditions, etc. that we discussed prior to the release. Perhaps we can put this on the agenda for the next telecon. Sheila Terry wrote: > People, > > one of my concerns about the profile is that one needs to be able > to refer back to the process model and the service itself from the profile. > In current profile files, I include not only instantiations of the profile > itself, but include instantiations for the service and a link to the > process model [1][2]. However, I feel we need a more explicit links > between components, other than the "supports", "implements" etc. > I've augmented the Service ontology [3] to include inverse relations, such > as "isPresentedBy", that would allow a profile to provide a reference to > a service. See http://www.daml.ri.cmu.edu/ont/Service.daml > > I'm not sure how people feel about incremental updates to the DAML-S > release, but until it is released to the broader community, I believe > we should make sure that it is up to date. So I advocate that if there > are no objections, that we consider using this new Service ontology. > > Also, I've not seen much in the way of feedback from the broader ws > community, or even from within our community on this release, and yet > Katia and I keep identifying errors and ambiguities within the work. > What is the current status of the weekly telecons, and do we plan to > progress further over the next month prior to the PI meeting? Has > anyone considered how this is going to be showcased? > > > Terry > > [1] http://www.daml.org/services/daml-s/2001/05/Congo-profile1.daml > [2] http://www.daml.org/services/daml-s/2001/05/AlphaAir-profile1.daml > [3] http://www.daml.ri.cmu.edu/ont/Service.daml
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 03/26/02 EST