Difference between revisions of "ServiceOntologies"

From Earth Science Information Partners (ESIP)
 
Line 9: Line 9:
 
====YOUR NAME HERE====
 
====YOUR NAME HERE====
  
 +
===IRI Data Library Function Ontology===
 
This is not a service ontology per se, but it is an ontology of functions, i.e. the key part of the services I would like to provide.  So it is midway between a use case and a service ontology, I guess.
 
This is not a service ontology per se, but it is an ontology of functions, i.e. the key part of the services I would like to provide.  So it is midway between a use case and a service ontology, I guess.
  

Latest revision as of 09:05, May 16, 2008

Service Ontology Links

Examples

Examples from http://www.daml.org/services/owl-s/1.0/examples.html

[CongoService.owl]

YOUR NAME HERE

IRI Data Library Function Ontology

This is not a service ontology per se, but it is an ontology of functions, i.e. the key part of the services I would like to provide. So it is midway between a use case and a service ontology, I guess.

The ontology is functions.owl, with instances at functions_ingrid.owl.

There is also an interface which displays the content of ontology as function documentation pages.

As for making these services, they would get wrapped: preceeded by a read-data-service command, and followed by a data-service-point command. They can also get strung together as a series of data filters, i.e. a scientific data flow. So I would also like to provide any legal concatenation of filters as a compound service. Another point of view, it is the scientific data flow that needs to be represented, with the actual breakdown into services a technical step hidden from the user.

Benno Blumenthal (Benno) 11:03, 16 May 2008 (EDT)