imported>KennethBaclawski: Fix PurpleMediaWiki references

2016-01-09T06:03:57Z

Fix PurpleMediaWiki references

New page

= [[ConferenceCall_2005_10_20|Ontolog Forum Panel Discussion]] Preparation Page =

=== Thursday 20 October 2005 ===

''(previously scheduled for 2005.10.27, this event has since been rescheduled to 2005.10.20)''

* '''Topic: "Semantic Web Service Ontology Standard"'''

* '''Moderator:''' [[NicolasRouquette|Nicolas Rouquette]]
* '''Organizing Team:''' [[NicolasRouquette|Nicolas Rouquette]], JohnDomingue, EMichaelMaximilien

* '''Panelists:'''
** JohnDomingue (WSMO), [[MichaelGruninger|Michael Grüninger]] (SWSF / FLOWS), [[AmitSheth|Amit Sheth]] of U of Georgia (WSDL-S), and [[DavidMartin|David Martin]] of SRI (OWL-S)

=== Proposed discussion agenda ===

* Welcome & introduction: different perspectives on WebServices (10 minutes)

*
** (1) Modeling web services (tool support for modeling, editing, describing, visualizing)
** (2) Doing stuff w/ web services (tool support for composition, coordination, orchestration - ignoring issues of distribution for now)
** (3) Web services in the semantic web (tool support for handling distribution issues: coordination/orchestration vs. transaction, service registration/discovery)
** (4) Web services as a business infrastructure (tool support for trust, security, authentification, price/resource/service negotiation)
** (5) Web services as a formal model of workflow computation (process semantics, AI-style planning, schedulability analysis)

* An ontology of Web Services technologies (5 minutes)

A brief overview of languages/tools/techniques in terms of how
they relate to the above pespectives/concerns. Details on specifics
deferred to short presentations.

TODO: use DavidMartin's slide #4 from SWANS presentation.

TODO: Provide URLs.

*
** WSDL => (1), (2), (3)
** WSDL-S => WSDL + (5)
** WSIF => WSDL + SOAP + => (1)
** BPEL4WS => (1), (2), (3)
** FLOWS => (1), (5)

* 4 x Short presentations (10 minutes overview + 10 minutes Q/A)

*
** To provide continuity and allow comparisons across presentations, illustrate
each approach using a common example w/ optional variation points.
** Points of variation: # of services/participants, location/distribution transparency
** Complex issues: service mismatch (e.g., side effects that may induce coordination/orchestration problems)

*
** TBD: OWL-S
(Ask: David Martin, Grit Denker, Everin Siri, someone at U.Southampton)

Focus on (1), (2), (5)

*
** JohnDomingue: WSMO

Focus on (1), (2), (3)

*
** [[RamaAkkiraju|Rama Akkiraju]], [[AmitSheth|Amit Sheth]]: WSDL-S / METEOR-S

Focus on (1), (2)

*
** MikeGrunninger: SWSF

Focus on (5), (2), (5)

*
** (a 5 minute note on): BPEL4WS

Legacy,plans,etc... relevant for (1), (3) & (4)

* Total: 1 hour 40 minutes

=== Pertinent Discussions so far ===

* 2005.06.23 Discussion leading to this program
** WSMO (Web Service Modeling Ontology), and possibly also, SWSF (Semantic Web Services Framework) - as proposed by [[DuaneNickull|Duane Nickull]] / [[NicolasRouquette|Nicolas Rouquette]] / [[PeterBrown|Peter Brown]] - ref. thread that started with http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum//ontolog-forum/2005-06/msg00017.html   
** candidate panelists:   
*** John Domingue of the Knowledge Media Institute at the Open University in the UK, who presented in Innsbruck - suggested by [[PeterBrown|Peter Brown]] - http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum//ontolog-forum/2005-06/msg00039.html   
*** reference: John Domingue's slides from the presentation at the recent W3C workshop on frameworks for semantics in web services, available at: http://www.w3.org/2005/04/FSWS/Submissions/1/wsmo_v10.pdf   
*** WSMO WG website - http://www.wsmo.org   
*** SDK cluster - 3 fairly large EU-based project   
*** currently lots of funding in Europe for semantic web work (and funding in US has just ended), therefore expecting new work to come from Europe   
*** three different viewpoints now - OWL/S, SWSI - FLOWS, and WSMO viewpoints - probably a bit early to talk about standardization   
** let's work with John Domingue toward a Oct 2005 panel discussion, with the 3 above viewpoints represented   
* 2005.06.30 Discussion Session: ref. our 2005.06.30 discussion session, [[MichaelGruninger|Michael Grüninger]] (who has been working on FLOWS and SWSF) indicated that this will be a session he will like to participate in too.   
* 2005.07.21 suggest [[NicolasRouquette|Nicolas Rouquette]] to be our moderator for this session   
* 2005.08.04 call - Date and Moderator confirmed:
** Oct. 27 2005 - Discussion on OWL/S, SWSI - FLOWS, and WSMO ... (need proper title) - Moderator: [[NicolasRouquette|Nicolas Rouquette]]   
** Peter and Nicolas will work offline to setup a new page for preparing this session   
** Michael: note also WSDL-S, try Amit Sheth (of Univ. of Georgia) or someone from IBM (contact Michael)   
** candidate panelists: JohnDomingue, [[MichaelGruninger|Michael Grüninger]], ..., [[NicolasRouquette|Nicolas Rouquette]] (moderator)   
* 2005.09.01 call - http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/2005-09/msg00002.html#nid05
** date of this event re-scheduled to Thursday, Oct. 20, 2005
** EMichaelMaximilien agreed to join [[NicolasRouquette|Nicolas Rouquette]] in helping organize this event
** 2005.09.05 [http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/2005-09/msg00005.html post] from EMichaelMaximilien: hoping to get folks from the OWL-S side of things to join us, e.g., Katia Sycara (CMU) and David Martin (SRI).
* 2005.09.09 / NicolasRouquette's input:
** I have looked at John Domingue's presentation. It is certainly helpful to understand what WSMO is conceptually.
From a practical point of view however, there are big differences in the way OWL-S, SWSF and WSMO
are described in various documents, presentations, etc... These differences mean that it is difficult for a practioner to
understand how these 3 models relate to one another.
*** Ideally, it would be great to have a metamodel mapping similar to the ODM that Elisa presented yesterday for OWL-S, SWSF and WSMO.
In practice, we need to scale back this mapping down to the core concepts that are important across models of web services.
So, I propose to focus on 2 groups of concepts:
*** Group1: describing how a web service actually works in terms of a computational model for executing it
**** In SWSF, that would be FLOWS (ontology for web services) and its rule-based execution model, ROWS
**** In OWL-S, that would be the process model
**** In WSMO, that would be the service interfaces specified as Abstract State Machines (ASM)
*** Group2: describing what a web service does for the purpose advertisement, matching, etc...
**** In SWSF, that would still be FLOWS & ROWS
**** In OWL-S, that would be the profile model
**** In WSMO, that would be the capabilities, goals, non-functional properties
*** For WSMO, we could easily get the relevant materials from [1] and [2].
**** [1] http://www.wsmo.org/TR/d17/v0.2/#s312
**** [2] http://www.wsmo.org/TR/d17/v0.2/#s313
*** For SWSF, I only know of [3] and [4]
**** [3] http://www.daml.org/services/swsf/1.1/swsl/
**** [4] http://www.daml.org/services/swsf/1.1/swso/
*** In many respects, both SWSO and WSMO subsume OWL-S
and as noted in SWSO and WSMO, these two approaches
seem to be conflicting views but can be in fact interpreted as complimentary to one another.
*** Using a common example from, e.g., [5] ([5] http://www.mindswap.org/2004/owl-s/services.shtml), I would like to have
a discussion where we use both WSMO and FLOWS/ROWS to
emphasize how we could improve that example w.r.t. two criteria:
**** Criteria 1) Clarifying the semantics of service specification
***** WSMO's capabilities[6,7] (incl. precon, postcond, ...) & FLOWS' activities & ordering constraints [8]
****** [6] http://www.wsmo.org/TR/d2/v1.2/#capability
****** [7] http://www.wsmo.org/TR/d16/d16.1/v0.2/#sec:wsml-capability-interface
****** [8] http://www.daml.org/services/swsf/1.1/swso/#process-model
***** Note that [6,7] don't really specify the semantics of capabilities, preconditions, etc..
whereas they are defined in FLOW's process model [8].
**** Criteria 2) Clarifying the semantics of service execution
***** b) WSMO's approach for process representation & execution w/ abstract state machines [9]
& SWSF's approach with FLOWS and ROWS as translated into SWSL-Rules [10]
****** [9] http://www.wsmo.org/TR/d13/d13.7/v0.2/#L502
****** [10] http://www.daml.org/services/swsf/1.1/swso/appendices/swso-rules.html
*** WSMO's edge over SWSF is, currently, in the extent of tool support available.
SWSF's edge over WSMO is in the semantic continuity that FLOWS & ROWS
bring across service specifications, descriptions and executions compared to WSMO's
multiple languages.
*** So, to better understand the practical relevance of both approaches, it would be
helpful to understand how these two approaches can complement each other.
* 2005.09.10 / EMichaelMaximilien's Input: (ref: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/2005-09/msg00017.html)
** As I suggested in my previous post, we should also include the WSDL-S effort. This has potential for significant traction in the SWS space since it takes a very pragmatic and lightweight approach to adding semantics to Web services. There are various communities already using the specification and it was submitted to the W3C. Here are some references:
*** [A] Web Services Semantics - WSDL-S: http://www.w3.org/2005/04/FSWS/Submissions/17/WSDL-S.htm
*** [B] http://www.alphaworks.ibm.com/tech/wssem
** There are also tools available for the Eclipse platform and others:
*** [a] METEOR-S tool from the University of Georgia: http://lsdis.cs.uga.edu/projects/meteor-s/
*** [b] Semantic tools for Web services from IBM's alphaWorks: http://www.alphaworks.ibm.com/tech/wssem
** Others are on the works. I have lined up the two point researchers from both University of Georgia and IBM Research (and teams) to participate in the call.
** Secondly, who are we inviting for the OWL-S side of the world?
* 2005.09.29 Ontolog Conference call discussion - Panelists situation:
**
*** John has also appraoched [[DieterFensel|Dieter Fensel]], Dieter cannot be with us this time; but we definitely look forward to having him talk to the Ontolog Forum at some other time. Thanks, John.
*** EMichaelMaximilien: Amit Sheth (University of Georgia and Semagix) will also be joining us
*** EMichaelMaximilien: ''...(other sugestions ... please add here) ...''
*** Nicolas will write to SRI to try to get a candidate to represent the OWL-S view
*** [[MonicaMartin|Monica Martin]]: in view of the focus of this discussion, maybe we should leave BPEL4WS out, because it calls for a slightly different discussion (more application oriented, and not anchored on ontological standards)
*** Both EMichaelMaximilien & Brand recommends David Martin from SRI
** JohnDomingue: project SUPER, Director Frank Leymann, at Univ of Stuggart (IBM architecture team), got 12 million Euro funding. John could write and invite him to participate. Maybe Frank can talk a bit about their vision from the floor.
** Brand also suggested looking over: http://www.brainstorm-group.com
* 2005.10.13: Official Announcement of the Session relased - http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum//ontolog-forum/2005-10/msg00018.html
* 2005.10.14: change in one of the panelists (as advised by EMichaelMaximilien) - [[AmitSheth|Amit Sheth]] will be presenting on the WSDL-S perspective, instead of [[RamaAkkiraju|Rama Akkiraju]]

== Outstanding Issues 2005.09.29 ==

* is JohnDomingue arranging for some more participants / panelists from Europe (as previously discussed)? - see above 2005.09.29 discussion
* EMichaelMaximilien: who are we inviting for the OWL-S side of the world? - see above 2005.09.29 discussion
* tie down the list of panelists - see above 2005.09.29 discussion
* what are we expecting from each panelist (5/10 minute openning? ... etc.) - see above "Proposed Discussion Agenda" (by Nicolas/2005.09.28)
* format/plan for the entire session - see above "Proposed Discussion Agenda" (by Nicolas/2005.09.28)
* put together an abstract for the wiki session page - Nicolas will handle
* drawn up a list of questions as "issues to be explored" - Nicolas will handle (use Nicolas' framework as a basis and compile from there.)
* we need the Bio's from [[RamaAkkiraju|Rama Akkiraju]], [[AmitSheth|Amit Sheth]], probably also [[DavidMartin|David Martin]] - EMichaelMaximilien & [[NicolasRouquette|Nicolas Rouquette]], please request from your respective invitee(s)

== Key items for transfer to the main session page ==

along with '''Date, Title, Moderator and List of Panelists'''

=== Abstract ===

''(please draft)''

== Pertinent Questions for Discussion ==

''(please draft and list)''

[[Category:Event_Meeting]] [[Category:WorkSpace]]

ConferenceCall 2005 10 20/Prep - Revision history

imported>KennethBaclawski: Fix PurpleMediaWiki references