I'm working in semantic web technologies in particular those of semantic web services: OWL-S , WSMO and SAWSDL.
I remark that SAWSDL becomes a W3C recommendation but OWL-S not yet. Knowing that, the OWL-S components have more semantic expressivity specifically the behavioral aspect of services. I'm asking why OWL-S still not a recommendation. Moreover, I remark that researches in the field of semantic web services have been almost abandoned?
Jim Hendler once said "A little semantics goes a long way" and I think that's the key here: SAWSDL is realtively lightweight and easily understood and used, whereas OWL-S, though certainly more expressive, has a higher barrier to adoption. WSMO has a variety of "dialects" some of which are relatively lightweight.
> the field of semantic web services have been almost abandoned?
No, the protocol for reading and writing the semantic data is now in the perimeter of the recommendation of SPARQL 1.1.
https://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-query/
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Mathematical Sciences
- Graphs