Web Service Semantics - WSDL-S Meenakshi Nagarajan for the WSDL-S team R. Akkiraju*, J. Farrell*, J.Miller, M. Nagarajan, M. Schmidt*, A. Sheth, K. Verma "Web Service Semantics - WSDL-S" A joint UGA-IBM* Technical Note, version 1.0, April 18, 2005. http://lsdis.cs.uga.edu/projects/METEOR-S/WSDL-S http://www.alphaworks.ibm.com/g/g.nsf/img/semanticsdocs/$file/wssemantic_annotation.pdf
Web Service Semantics - WSDL-S. Meenakshi Nagarajan for the WSDL-S team R. Akkiraju * , J. Farrell * , J.Miller, M. Nagarajan, M. Schmidt * , A. Sheth, K. Verma "Web Service Semantics - WSDL-S" - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Web Service Semantics - WSDL-S
Meenakshi Nagarajan
for theWSDL-S team
R. Akkiraju*, J. Farrell*, J.Miller, M. Nagarajan, M. Schmidt*, A. Sheth, K. Verma "Web Service Semantics - WSDL-S"
A joint UGA-IBM* Technical Note, version 1.0, April 18, 2005. http://lsdis.cs.uga.edu/projects/METEOR-S/WSDL-S
Sivashanmugam, K., Verma, K., Sheth, A., Miller, J., Adding Semantics to Web Services Standards, ICWS 2003
<Operation>
<Output1>
Web service 1
<Input1>
<Operation>
<Output2>
Web service 2
<Input2>
Composition
3
Adding semantics to WSDL – guiding principles• Build on existing Web Services standards
• Mechanism independent of the semantic representation language
• Mechanism should allow the association of multiple annotations written in different semantic representation languages
4
Guiding principles...
• Support semantic annotation of Web Services whose data types are described in XML schema
• Provide support for rich mapping mechanisms between Web Service schema types and ontologies
5
WSDL-S• Offer an evolutionary and compatible upgrade of
existing Web services standards
• Externalize the semantic domain models– agnostic to ontology representation languages.– reuse of existing domain models– allows annotation using multiple ontologies (same or
different domain)
• updating tools around WSDL is relatively easier
6
Semantic annotations on WSDL elements• Annotating message types (XSD complex types and
• Annotating operations– extension elements : precondition and effect
(child elements of the operation element)– extension attribute : category
(on the interface element)– extension element : action
(on operation element)
IBM_USER
<Rama>I suggest we select an example scenario here and walk users through a demo and then pull up a WSDL-s annotation and tell them the additions we made. A demo with a scenario engages the audiences right away.Showing the annotation editor here could go a long way in making the point. </Rama>
<!—Precondition and effect are added as extensible elements on an operation><wssem:precondition name="ExistingAcctPrecond"wssem:modelReference="POOntology#AccountExists"><wssem:effect name="ItemReservedEffect"wssem:modelReference="POOntology#ItemReserved"/></operation></interface>
• modelReference at the complex type level– Typically used when specifying complex associations at leaf level is not possible– Allows for specification of a mapping function
semantic match
12
• modelReference at the leaf levels– assumes a 1:1 correspondence between leaf elements and domain model
<Rama> I recommend using XSLT, which is a bit more readable and less overwhelming than XQuery functions.</Rama>
14
WSDL-S in perspective
15
WSDL-S evolution
Action Attribute for Functional Annotation
Pre and Post Conditions
Can use XML, OWL
or UML types
ExtensionAdaptation
schemaMapping
IBM_USER
<Joel>In the interest of time, this could be dropped, but we need to be sure to mention that the modelReferences are independent of the ontology representation language
Not sure that we have time. We have other examples that should get the point accross.
19
WSDL-S collaborations
• Meteor-S collaboration with WSMO– Using WSDL-S for grounding Web services
annotated with WSML ontologies
• Influencing OASIS / W3C
Requestor’s goal Service capability
WSDL-S
WSML WSML
Kunal Verma, Adrian Mochan, Michal Zaremba, Amit Sheth, John Miller, Christoph Bussler, Linking Semantics Web service Efforts - Integrating WSMX and METEOR-S, Second International Workshop on Semantic and Dynamic Web Processes, July 2005
<Joel>Points I would make:If more revolutionary approaches are pursued, we must be sure that existing WSDL, XML Schemas for business documents, and the tools that exploit them can still be leveraged.WSDL-S could be that bridge. This is a key success factor.
compatible with the existing WSDL standard– practical for adoption
• Approach agnostic to semantic representation language– reuse of domain models– flexibility in choice of modeling language– annotation with multiple ontologies
• Ease in tool upgrades– e.g. wsif / axis invocation