Lists Home |
Date Index |
On Thu, 30 Jan 2003 11:58:17 -0500, Simon St.Laurent
> Could you explain this one a bit more?
Wild shot in the dark: WSDL identifies the machine-processable syntax of
the interaction between a web service provider and consumer. RDDL provides
a human readable description of the semantics of the service (and
potentially a machine processable description, if RDDL stays in the RDF
realm and an instance contains or points to a rich RDF description.
Clearly both the semantic understanding and the syntax of the interaction
are needed. David Booth has a great paper (I hope I'm not jumping the gun
by pointing the world to it!) that emphasizes that humans, and semantic
understanding of what the page/service/etc. that a URI signifies, are
necessary components of a Web services architecture.
In my opinion, which seems to be shared by many people on the WSA WG, FWIW,
The Web As We Know It is "Scenario 0" in David's framework: The semantics
of the "service" are negotiated totally out of band or inmplicitly
understood by a human reading the page, and the "web service description"
consists solely of the URI.
The Semantic Web could be Scenario N in his framework, where the semantic
descriptions are machine processable and somehow tie into the syntactic
description of the web page or service invocation in a way that a machine
Whether or not David's framework can be made to work in a formal
architecture, it represents the SPIRIT of what I think is needed --
integrating the Web, Web services, and the Semantic Web viewpoints as
special cases of one another rather than as alternate "paradigms" that must
be accepted or rejected as dogma.