Semantic Matching of Web Services Capabilities
The Web is moving from being a collection of pages toward a collection of services that interoperate through the Internet. The first step toward this interoperation is the location of other services that can help toward the solution of a problem. In this paper we claim that location of web services should be based on the semantic match between a declarative description of the service being sought, and a description of the service being offered. Furthermore, we claim that this match is outside the representation capabilities of registries such as UDDI and languages such as WSDL.
We propose a solution based on DAML-S, a DAML-based language for service description, and we show how service capabilities are presented in the Profile section of a DAML-S description and how a semantic match between advertisements and requests is performed.
- 1.Jim Blythe and Manuela Veloso. Analogical replay for efficient conditional planning. In Proceedings of the 14th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-97), pages 668–673. AAAI Press / MIT Press, 1997.Google Scholar
- 2.US Census Bureau. North american industry classification system (naics). http://www.census.gov/epcd/www/naics.html, 1997.
- 3.Erik Christensen, Francisco Curbera, Greg Meredith, and Sanjiva Weerawarana. Web Services Description Language (WSDL) 1.1. http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/NOTE-wsdl-20010315, 2001.
- 4.DAML Joint Committee. Daml+oil (march 2001) language. http://www.daml.org/2001/03/daml+oil-index.html, 2001.
- 5.Dieter Fensel, V. Richard Benjamins, Enrico Motta, and Bob J. Wielinga. UPML: A framework for knowledge system reuse. In IJCAI, pages 16–23, 1999.Google Scholar
- 6.David Martin, Adam Cheyer, and Douglas Moran. The Open Agent Architecture: A Framework for Building Distributed Software Systems. Applied Artificial Intelligence, 13(1–2):92–128, 1999.Google Scholar
- 7.P. Massonet and A. van Lamsweerde. Analogical reuse of requirements frameworks. In Proc. of the 3rd IEEE Int. Symp. on Requirements Engineering (RE’97), pages 26–39, 1997.Google Scholar
- 8.Yun Peng and Nenad Ivezic. Semantic resolution inf multi-agent systems. In Proc. of Goddard/JPl Workshop On Radical Agent Concepts, 2002.Google Scholar
- 9.Brad Perry, Malcolm Taylor, and Amy Unruh. Information aggregation and agent interaction patterns in infosleuth. In cia99. ACM Press, 1999.Google Scholar
- 10.Ruben Prieto-Diaz. Implementing Faceted Classification for Software Reuse. Communications of ACM, 134:88–97, 1991.Google Scholar
- 11.Katia Sycara and Mattheus Klusch. Brokering and matchmaking for coordination of agent societies: A survey. In Omicini et al, editor, Coordination of Internet Agents. Springer, 2001.Google Scholar
- 12.Katia Sycara, Mattheus Klusch, Seth Widoff, and Janguo Lu. Dynamic service matchmaking among agents in open information environments. ACM SIGMOD Record (Special Issue on Semantic Interoperability in Global Information Systems), 28(1):47–53, 1999.Google Scholar
- 13.UDDI. The UDDI Technical White Paper. http://www.uddi.org/, 2000.
- 14.W3C. Extensible markup language (xml) 1.0 (second edition). http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-xml-20001006, 2000.
- 15.W3C. Soap version 1.2, w3c working draft 17 december 2001. http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/WD-soap12-part0-20011217/, 2001.
- 16.Amy Moormann Zaremski and Jeannette M. Wing. Specification matching software components. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology, 1997.Google Scholar