1. * * 0 OWL-S: Ontology Web Language For Services Reyhan AYDOĞAN Emre YILMAZ 21/12/2005OWL-S: Ontology Web Language for Services

2. * * 0 OUTLINE Introduction Motivation for OWL-S The parts of OWL-S –Service Profile –Service Model –Grounding Comparison with Related Technologies Examples and Discussions 21/12/2005OWL-S: Ontology Web Language for Services

3. * * 0 Introduction OWL-S: –An ontology of service –As a part of DARPA Agent Mark-up Program Traditional systems: –Lack of semantic description of Services –Requirement of human assistant 21/12/2005OWL-S: Ontology Web Language for Services

4. * * 0 Motivations for OWL-S Automatic Web Service Discovery Automatic Web Service Invocation Automatic Web Service Composition & Interoperation Automatic Web Service Execution Monitoring 21/12/2005OWL-S: Ontology Web Language for Services

5. * * 0 Automatic Web Service Discovery E.g.: Selling Airline ticket accepting particular credit card Declarative advertisements of service properties for automatic service discovery 21/12/2005OWL-S: Ontology Web Language for Services Use Search engine Read Web Page Execute the service Manually Satisfies the constraints??

6. * * 0 Automatic Web Service Invocation Execution of Web service by computer program or agent E.g.: Purchasing an airline ticket Machine understands what input, output, how to execute the service 21/12/2005OWL-S: Ontology Web Language for Services Fill a form Click button for execution Human performs

7. * * 0 Automatic Web Service Composition and Interoperation Automatic selection, composition and interoperation E.g. Travel Arrangement Declaring prerequisites and effect of service 21/12/2005OWL-S: Ontology Web Language for Services Select the web service Specify the composition manually Check necessity of software for interoperation Human

8. * * 0 Automatic Web Service Execution Monitoring The ability to find out: –Where the request is in the process –The status of the request –Be sure the service made –Unanticipated exception 21/12/2005OWL-S: Ontology Web Language for Services

9. * * 0 21/12/2005OWL-S: Ontology Web Language for Services Parts of Service Ontology Is Taken From [1]

10. * * 0 Service Profile Describe the service what does –Service name, Text Description and Contact Information Similar to yellow pages Gives information about the functionality –IOPE s of Service Gives the characteristics features of the services –Quality ratings of service –Classification information Enables automatic discovery 21/12/2005OWL-S: Ontology Web Language for Services

11. * * 0 21/12/2005OWL-S: Ontology Web Language for Services OLW-S & UDDI Mapping Is Taken From [2]

12. * * 0 Service Model Describes how service works Includes Data and control flow of service process Does not enforce the consistency with Service Profile –Traveling service in profile – Book Service in service process model Process Model is subclass of Service Model 21/12/2005OWL-S: Ontology Web Language for Services

13. * * 0 21/12/2005OWL-S: Ontology Web Language for Services Process Ontology Is Taken From [1]

14. * * 0 21/12/2005OWL-S: Ontology Web Language for Services Is Taken From [6] Example: Process Sequence

15. * * 0 Grounding Describes how to access the service Concrete description such as binding protocol, address, message formats, etc. WSDL + OWL-S –Type : Includes OWL-S class types –Message: OWL-S inputs and OWL-S outputs –Operation:OWL-S atomic process –Binding: Encoding Style supplied 21/12/2005OWL-S: Ontology Web Language for Services

16. * * 0 21/12/2005OWL-S: Ontology Web Language for Services Sample WSDL file taken from [7] Example: WSDL+OLWS

17. * * 0 21/12/2005OWL-S: Ontology Web Language for Services Sample WSDL file taken from [7] Example: WSDL+OLWS Cont.

18. * * 0 Comparison with Related Technologies UDDI - Used mostly in registering services. - UDDI has 2 drawbacks: 21/12/2005OWL-S: Ontology Web Language for Services 1.provides a search mechanism depending on keywords 2.lacks the semantic description - Advantage of UDDI It guarantees syntactical interoperability to OWL-S

19. * * 0 Comparison with Related Technologies - Because of these reasons OWL-S and UDDI complements eachother, we need a maping between them. 21/12/2005OWL-S: Ontology Web Language for Services UDDI (continues) Is Taken From [2]

20. * * 0 Comparison with Related Technologies - can be compared with the OWL-S service model in terms of expressiveness, semantics, monitoring and fault handling - In addition to the input and output in BPEL4WS, OWL-S add the precondition and effects. - OWL-S is based on formal semantics (advantage of OWL-S) 21/12/2005OWL-S: Ontology Web Language for Services BPEL4WS

21. * * 0 Comparison with Related Technologies - BPEL4WS provides handling mechanisms of faults, OWL-S does not support any recovery protocols. - Execution monitoring task is in the future list of BPE4WS.However both of OWL-S and BPEL4WS do not support execution monitoring now. - WS-Coordination and WS-Transaction may extend by BPEL4WS. 21/12/2005OWL-S: Ontology Web Language for Services BPEL4WS(continues)

22. * * 0 Example 21/12/2005OWL-S: Ontology Web Language for Services Currency Controller -Service - $Id: currencyconverter-service.daml,v 1.0 2003/03/04 23:47:36 trp Exp $ DAML-S Coalition: Currency Converter Example for DAML-S release 0.7 Service description

23. * * 0 Example 21/12/2005OWL-S: Ontology Web Language for Services Currency Controller -Service (continues) - - -

24. * * 0 Example 21/12/2005 Currency Controller -Service Profile - Class that represents Information Translation Services - - Research Assessment Exercise Ratings - Terry Payne Lecturer +44(0)23 8059 8343 +44(0)23 8059 2865 trp@ecs.soton.ac.uk University of Southampton, Southampton, SO17 1BJ, UK http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~trp

25. * * 0 Example 21/12/2005 Currency Controller -Service Process Model <!-- Instance Definition of the Process Model --> - - <!-- ########################################################################## This is the top level process - <!-- IOPEs --> - - OWL-S: Ontology Web Language for Services

26. * * 0 Example 21/12/2005 Currency Controller -Grounding <!-- Instance Definition of the Grounding Model --> - - - <!-- Collecton of all the groundings specifications --> - <!-- ############################################################### --> - <!-- # call_SotonCCSW (Atomic) # --> - OWL-S: Ontology Web Language for Services

27. * * 0 Example - <!-- Grounding for the Atomic Process call_SotonCCWS --> - <!-- Reference to the corresponding WSDL operation --> - - <!-- Reference to the WSDL input message --> - - <!-- Mapping of DAML-S inputs to WSDL message parts --> - - Currency Controller –Grounding Cont. OWL-S: Ontology Web Language for Services 21/12/2005

28. * * 0 References 21/12/2005OWL-S: Ontology Web Language for Services 1. The OWL Services Coalition, OWL-S: Semantic Markup for Web Services, available at http://www.daml.org/services/owl-s/1.0/owl-s.pdf. 2. D. Martin, Artificial Intelligence Center, SRI International, Menlo Park, CA, USA, M. Paolucci, Robotics Institute, Carnegia Mellon University, S. McIlraith, Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto, M. Burstein, D. McDermott, D. McGuinness, B. Parsia, T. Payne, M. Sabou, M. Solanki, N. Srinivasan, K. Sycara, Bringing Semantics to Web Services: The OWL-S Approach. 3. N.Srinivasan, M. Paolucci, K.Sycara, Robotics Institute, Carnegia Mellon University, Adding OWL-S to UDDI, implementation and throughput. 4. DAML-S and Related Technologies, available at http://www.daml.org/services/owl- s/1.0/survey.pdf 5. OWL-S Homepage, http://www.daml.org/services/owl-s/ 6. P.S Munindar. and N.H Mitchael, Service Oriented Computing: Semantics, Processes and Agents, Willey, England,2005. 7. D. Martin, M. Burstein, O. Lassia, M. Paolucci, T. Payne, S. McIlraith, Describing Web Services using OWL-S and WSDL, DAML-S Coalition Working Document, October 2003. 8. Examples from http://www.daml.org/services/owl-s/examples.html

29. * * 0 21/12/2005OWL-S: Ontology Web Language for Services Thank you for listening!