WSMO - revisited - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Wsmo revisited
Download
1 / 19

WSMO - revisited. SWSL phone conference, 17-06-2004 Dieter Fensel Digital Enterprise Research Institute dieter.fensel@deri.org. Outline. The new structure and main deliverables: WSMO Working Group WSML Working Group WSMX Working Group Links to SWSL Rule language

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.

Download Presentation

WSMO - revisited

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Wsmo revisited

WSMO - revisited

SWSL phone conference, 17-06-2004

Dieter Fensel

Digital Enterprise Research Institute

dieter.fensel@deri.org


Outline

Outline

  • The new structure and main deliverables:

    • WSMO Working Group

    • WSML Working Group

    • WSMX Working Group

  • Links to SWSL

    • Rule language

    • Choreography/Orchestration language

Dieter Fensel

dieter.fensel@deri.org


Working groups general overview

Working Groups – general overview

WSMO WG

A Conceptual Model for SWS

WSML WG

WSMX WG

A Formal Language for WSMO

An Execution Environment for WSMO

A Rule-based Language for SW

Dieter Fensel

dieter.fensel@deri.org


Wsmo wg

WSMO WG

  • Web site at http://www.wsmo.org/

  • Chairs: Christoph Bussler and Dieter Fensel.

  • Mailing list for group members:

    deri-wsmo@informatik.uibk.ac.at

  • Mailing list for technical discussions:deri-wsmo-discussion@informatik.uibk.ac.at

  • Contact: dumitru.roman@deri.ie

  • Activity sheet: http://www.wsmo.org/2004/d6/d6.1/v1/Around 14 deliverables with defined editors and deadlines.

  • Members: http://www.wsmo.org/people.htmlCurrently 58 members.

  • Presentations: http://www.wsmo.org/presentations.htmlCurrently more than 45 presentations on related aspects.

  • Current working drafts: http://www.wsmo.org/2004/

Dieter Fensel

dieter.fensel@deri.org


Wsmo main deliverables

WSMO – main deliverables

  • Conceptual model for Semantic Web Services

    • WSMO Standard (D2)

    • WSMO Lite (D11)

    • WSMO Full (D12)

  • Choreography (D14) and Orchestration (D15)

    • Not yet clearly defined.

    • Intention: use ASMs.

  • Showcasing: WSMO Primer (D3.1) and Case Studies (D3.2)

  • Conceptual Comparison WSMO/OWL-S (D4.1)

  • WSMO Tutorial (D17)

  • WSMO in DIP(D19.1), KW(D19.2) and SEKT(D19.3)

Dieter Fensel

dieter.fensel@deri.org


Wsml wg

WSML WG

  • Web site at http://www.wsmo.org/wsml

  • Chair: Dieter Fensel.

  • Mailing list for group members:

    deri-wsml@informatik.uibk.ac.at

  • Mailing list for technical discussions:deri-wsmo-discussion@informatik.uibk.ac.at

  • Contact: dumitru.roman@deri.ie

  • Activity sheet: http://www.wsmo.org/2004/d6/d6.2/v1/Around 18 deliverables with defined editors and deadlines.

  • Members: http://www.wsmo.org/people.htmlCurrently 16 members.

  • Presentations: http://www.wsmo.org/presentations.htmlCurrently 13 presentations on related aspects

  • Current working drafts: http://www.wsmo.org/2004/

Dieter Fensel

dieter.fensel@deri.org


Wsml main deliverables

WSML – main deliverables

  • WSML language

    • WSML User language (D16.1)

    • WSML/XML (An XML Syntax for WSML) (D16.3)

      • F-logic/XML (An XML Syntax for F-logic) (D16.2)

    • WSML OWL Syntax (D16.5) – not yet defined

  • Inferencing with WSML

    • Inferencing support for SWS: Proof Obligations (D5.1)

    • Inferencing Support for Semantic Web Services: Tools for Semantic Support (D5.2)

  • Language Evaluation and Comparison (D8)

  • Mapping to OWL-S (D4.3) – not yet defined.

  • Ontology Language API (D18)

  • OWL-Lite¯ (D20)

Dieter Fensel

dieter.fensel@deri.org


Wsmx wg

WSMX WG

  • Web site at http://www.wsmx.org/

  • Chair: Christoph Bussler.

  • Mailing list for group members:

    deri-wsmx@informatik.uibk.ac.at

  • Mailing list for technical discussions:deri-wsmo-discussion@informatik.uibk.ac.at

  • Contact: michal.zaremba@deri.ie

  • Activity sheet: http://www.wsmo.org/2004/d6/d6.3/v1/Around 12 deliverables with defined editors and deadlines.

  • Members: http://www.wsmo.org/people.htmlCurrently 33 members.

  • Current working drafts: http://www.wsmo.org/2004/

Dieter Fensel

dieter.fensel@deri.org


Wsmx main deliverables

WSMX – main deliverables

  • WSMO Editor (D9)

  • WSMO Registry (D10)

  • Overview and Scope of WSMX (D13.0)

    • WSMX Conceptual Model (D13.1)

    • WSMX Execution Semantics (D13.2)

    • WSMX Mediation (D13.3)

    • WSMX Architecture (D13.4)

    • WSMX Implementation (D13.5) – first version expected end of June, 2004.

Dieter Fensel

dieter.fensel@deri.org


Links to swsl

Links to SWSL

  • Rule language effort

  • Choreography and orchestration language

Dieter Fensel

dieter.fensel@deri.org


Rule language effort

Rule language effort

Six points I want to make:

  • DL is an interesting subset of 1st order logic

  • HL is an interesting subset of 1st order logic

  • Full 1st order logic is an interesting language

  • Pure logics are cumbersome tools for modeling

  • SWRL is crap

  • A useful rule language for the semantic web must follow a DL-minimalistic approach

Dieter Fensel

dieter.fensel@deri.org


1 dl is interesting

(1) DL is interesting

  • because of its decidability/tractability properties

  • spoken for the man on the street it is the fragment of logic that can be computationally explored around the existential quantifier.

  • it is therefore worth to become standardized in OWL

  • besides the fact that I do not like at all OWL-Lite which is an overkill,

  • a smooth extension of RDFS would have been much more appropriate.

  • Therefore we develope OWL-Flight (restricting OWL-Lite to DLP and extend it by RDF features).     

Dieter Fensel

dieter.fensel@deri.org


2 hl is interesting

(2) HL is interesting

  • because of its decidability/tractability properties

  • Spoken for the man on the street it is the fragment of logic that can be computationally explored around the all quantifier

  • without function symbols it is decidable and

  • with minimal-model semantics function symbols, non-monotinicity of negation, and even transitive closure (an extension of first order logic) can be expressed.

  • It is therefore worth to become standardized by W3C, however, not in a way that destroy all features of rule languages by mixing it up too much with DL type of expressions.

  • Therefore we develope OWL-Flight (restricting OWL-Lite to DLP and extend it by rule features).  

Dieter Fensel

dieter.fensel@deri.org


3 first order logic is interesting

(3) First order logic is interesting

  • In oposition to DLs and HLs it provides significant more flexibility in writing down required axioms.

  • This language is not fully mechanizable in terms ofreasoning support, however,

  • many interesting theorems can be proven and the theorem prover community has made significant progress over the last years.

  • First order language could define the common umbrella, where DLs and HLs are sublanguages and unified.

  • Therefore, we will redefine OWL-Full.

Dieter Fensel

dieter.fensel@deri.org


4 pure logic is cumbersom

(4) Pure logic is cumbersom

  • Pure logics is a cumbersome tool for modeling

  • Therefore, extensions like Flogic that allow quantification over classes and attributes are that helpful.

  • W3C recommendations should care for this if they want to make their languages widely adopted.

  • OWL-Flight provide these features.

Dieter Fensel

dieter.fensel@deri.org


5 i strongly dislike swrl

(5) I strongly dislike SWRL

  • since it spoils the nice properties of rule languages for the price of defining the rule language as an extension of DLs.

  • SWRL is meaningless since it defines a syntactical restriction of 1st order logic without any computational justification.

  • SWRL is as undecidable and untractable as first order logic.

  • Therefore, it is meaningless to syntactically restrict first order logic in that way.

Dieter Fensel

dieter.fensel@deri.org


6 a useful rule language for the semantic web must follow a different approach

(6) A useful rule language for the semantic web must follow a different approach

  • It should emply the full power of the HL fragment and include DL features only in case they do not harm this language type.

  • Therefore, a HL language should be defined as an extension of RDFS and/or OWL-Lite (where OWL Lite is reduced to an actual lite subset of DL).

  • That is the rationale underlying OWL-Flight.

Dieter Fensel

dieter.fensel@deri.org


Choreography and orchestration

Choreography and orchestration

  • Choreography is about communication

  • Orchestration is about task decomposition

  • Both elements require the specification of dynamics

  • We are using Abstract State Machines as a point of departure to formalize the basic principles for these languages.

  • And we are very eager to learn from you!

Dieter Fensel

dieter.fensel@deri.org


Wsmo revisited

</ WSMO >

<Q&A>


  • Login