[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

RE: RE: Caution using XML Schema backward- or forward-compatib

• From: "Costello, Roger L." <costello@m...>
• To: <xml-dev@l...>
• Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2007 19:31:19 -0500

> So this supports my hunch that what we all need for a 
> further technological step is to start adding the semantics, 
> via say RDF, etc, to the basic WSDL and XSD of web services.

I think that for a client to be able to utilize a web service, the web
service must specify three things:

(1) Syntax of the data that the web service makes available to clients;
use a grammar-based language such as XML Schemas, or RELAX NG, or DTD.

(2) Relationship constraints (e.g. co-constraints) on the data; use
Schematron.

(3) Semantics of the data; use a data dictionary, or English prose, or
RDF/S, or OWL, some combination thereof.

I believe that today's WSDLs only address (1).

/Roger



-----Original Message-----
From: Stephen Green [mailto:stephengreenubl@g...] 
Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2007 6:32 PM
To: Fraser Goffin
Cc: Costello, Roger L.; xml-dev@l...
Subject: Re:  RE: Caution using XML Schema backward- or
forward-compatibility as a versioning strategy for data exchange

On 29/12/2007, Fraser Goffin <goffinf@g...> wrote:
> ... Is
> it really the case that we will have callers of a business service
who
> DON'T have a clear understanding of it's purpose (semantics) ? ...
and
> if the semantics aren't conveyed in the technical artefacts
> (WSDL/XSD), can we really have 'unknown' callers (h'mmm not sure) ??
>

So this supports my hunch that what we all need for a further
technological
step is to start adding the semantics, via say RDF, etc, to the basic
WSDL
and XSD of web services. This ties the semantics more firmly to the
syntax.
It then obliges service consumers to 'understand' (both in the human,
and
hopefully also in the machine processing sense) the semantics when
using
the syntax. It also will, hopefully, maximize the visibility of both
changes
to semantics and to syntax/structure. Isn't this a natural extension of
the
semantic web/Web 3.0 principles and in a very worthwhile direction?
More
intelligent web services?

-- 
Stephen Green

Partner
SystML, http://www.systml.co.uk
Tel: +44 (0) 117 9541606

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew+22:37 .. and voice

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: RE: Caution using XML Schema backward- or forward-compatibilityas a versioning strategy for data exchange
    • From: Thomas Lord <lord@e...>

• References:
  • Caution using XML Schema backward- or forward-compatibility as a versioning strategy for data exchange
    • From: "Costello, Roger L." <costello@m...>
  • RE: Caution using XML Schema backward- or forward-compatibilityas a versioning strategy for data exchange
    • From: "Cox, Bruce" <Bruce.Cox@U...>
  • Re: RE: Caution using XML Schema backward- or forward-compatibilityas a versioning strategy for data exchange
    • From: Thomas Lord <lord@e...>
  • RE: RE: Caution using XML Schema backward- or forward-compatibility as a versioning strategy for data exchange
    • From: "Costello, Roger L." <costello@m...>
  • Re: RE: Caution using XML Schema backward- or forward-compatibility as a versioning strategy for data exchange
    • From: "Fraser Goffin" <goffinf@g...>
  • Re: RE: Caution using XML Schema backward- or forward-compatibility as a versioning strategy for data exchange
    • From: "Stephen Green" <stephengreenubl@g...>