Enterprise Architecture in SOA:Enterprise Architecture in SOA:Models and Methodologies Models and Methodologies

Ralph HodgsonRalph HodgsonCEO, TopQuadrant

email: rhodgson@topquadrant.com

blog: http://topquadrant.typepad.com/ralph_hodgson

May 23rd, 2005

Going Semantic

CoverageCoverage

Semantic technology

Enterprise architecture and semantic technology

Enterprise architecture maturity model

Capabilities of semantic enterprise architecture

The US Federal Enterprise Architecture (FEA) Case study - using OWL ontologies for FEA and agency extensions to FEA.

Introduction: Ralph HodgsonIntroduction: Ralph Hodgson

Object Technologist since 1982 Came to US in 1994 to help create IBM’s Object

Technology Practice Founding member of IBM’s Java and Emerging

Technology Practice and IBM’s Portal Practice Co-founder of TopQuadrant, Inc. in 2001

– Ontology development, solution envisioning and solution architecture for semantic web applications

Recent work:– NASA Space Engineering Ontologies and model-based life-

cycles– GSA for FEA-RMO ontologies– FEA extensions, DOD and DODAF ontologies

Introducing TopQuadrant:Introducing TopQuadrant:Consultants in Semantic TechnologyConsultants in Semantic Technology

Ontology Development and Solution Envisioning for

Semantic Web Applications

Semantic Technology for Enterprise Architecture

‘Get Ready for Semantic Web’

Training program – next dates:

June 27 – 30, Washington, DC

Semantic technology is about putting Ontologies to Semantic technology is about putting Ontologies to workwork

So, what is an ontology?– It is a run time model of information– Defined using constructs for:

Concepts – classesRelationships – properties (object and data)Rules – axioms and constraintsInstances of concepts – individuals (data)

Semantic web ontologies are defined using W3C standards: RDF/S and OWL

This is an OntologyThis is an Ontology

Ontologies are like and unlike other IT modelsOntologies are like and unlike other IT models

Like databases ontologies are used by applications at run time (queried and reasoned over) – Unlike databases, relationships are first-class constructs

Like object models ontologies describe classes and attributes (properties)– Unlike object models, ontologies are set-based

Like business rules they encode rules– Unlike business rules, ontologies organize rules using axioms

Like XML schemas they are native to the web (and are in fact serialized in XML)– Unlike XML schemas, ontologies are graphs not trees and

used for reasoning

Realizing a semantic solution:Realizing a semantic solution:Required ComponentsRequired Components

Triple Store:– Kowari, Oracle, RDFGateway™, Sesame

Query Engine:– RDFGateway, Cerebra, HP Jena

Inferencing Engine:– Cerebra™, OntoBroker, Pellet, Racer, …

Application Builder:– RDFGateway™, Haystack

Visualization:– K-Infinity™, GraphViz,

Ontology Builder:– Protégé, SWOOP, …

Content Acquirers:– Translators, Scripts, TopBraid™, Semagix Freedom™, …

Realizing a semantic solution:Realizing a semantic solution:Vertical Application PlatformsVertical Application Platforms

Knowledge and Content Management– Semagix– SemanTX Life Sciences– Siderian– Profium

Semantic Interoperability– Cerebra– OntoBroker– OntologyWorks

IT Management– Metallect– Unicorn Solutions

An Impressive list of vendors are adopting An Impressive list of vendors are adopting Semantic Web StandardsSemantic Web Standards

Adobe BT Cisco IBM Oracle SAP Software AG Verio …

Large Enterprises with Large Enterprises with Semantic Web Pilots in ProgressSemantic Web Pilots in Progress

Audi Daimler Chrysler GE GM HP Microsoft NASA Sun Time Warner US Customs US GSA Cisco …

Why is semantic technology relevant to Why is semantic technology relevant to Enterprise Architecture?Enterprise Architecture?

An EA is a model of an enterprise expressing how:– people in roles,– performing activities,– using capabilities,– provided by systems

and resources,– overcome challenges

and generate value– with measurable results

for realizing business goals

source of the plan:www.nzherald.co.nz/index.cfm?ObjectID=10007286,

http://media.apn.co.nz/webcontent/image/gif/districtplan.GIF

This is a “Knowledge Model”.

Semantic Web Technologies are about modeling knowledge

Ontology can express the relationships in the Ontology can express the relationships in the Enterprise ArchitectureEnterprise Architecture

Bridges the gaps between business, technology and IT

Makes Value Nets “Navigate-able”

Makes Capabilities “Knowledge-able”

Makes Components “Knowledge-able”

Uses Semantic-Enabled Collaborative Tools

Component knows:where it is used, how it is realized, what it depends on,its measures of effectiveness

Knowledge Model using Semantic TechnologyBehavior Model for inferencingFederated ArchitectureAnalytical ToolsDecision Support

Capability knows:why it exists,what enterprise activities need it used, what it depends on, its measures of effectiveness

“Line of Sight” across:extended enterprise business unitswithin business unitsto measures of effectiveness

“Connects the dots” across:Business, technology and IT models

Semantic Systems infer answers Semantic Systems infer answers from a knowledge basefrom a knowledge base

Who is using what systems to do what?

Systems

Capabilities

Activities

Intents

StakeholdersWhat do I depend on to be effective?

What outcomes does this activity support?

Data can come from a variety of sources. Semantic model merges and integrates.

Enterprise Architecture Maturity ModelEnterprise Architecture Maturity Model

4. Connections between different systems and tools are established.

Enterprise Architecture Maturity LevelsEnterprise Architecture Maturity Levels

Ad hoc

Standardized

Formal

Federated

Executable

1. No common reference framework. Possible use of case tools. Little commonality between descriptions produced by different people and/or groups.

2. Established methodology for describing architectures. Use of industry standard/custom framework. Methodology not fully supported and enforced by tools.

3. Methodology enforced by tools based on a “Reference architecture”. Multiple tools in use, but from different vendors with low levels of interoperability. Reference framework and architectural models cannot be readily queried.

5. Models are consultable by applications at run time. Knowledge about enterprise activities, systems & capabilities becomes a real time resource.

Enterprise Architecture CapabilitiesEnterprise Architecture Capabilities

Ad hoc

Standardized

Formal

Federated

Executable

Some sharing of architectural

ideas.

Document provisioning

Architectural models produced by different groups can be understood

more easily. Linkages can be described.

EA framework compliance

Architects can adhere to the framework. Improved productivity of architects as well as

improved fidelity of models.

“What-If” analysis, reports.Centralized IT governance

Architectural models are accessible across organizational contexts.

Information can be independently constructed, aggregated and made accessible to wide audiences.

Aggregation and exchange of data and metadata. Federated IT governance

Improved enterprise agility. Real-time decision support and re-configuration of capabilities. Models stay in-sync with the real world.

Adaptive enterprise capability management and service provisioning

Benefits

Capabilities

Enterprise Architecture TechnologiesEnterprise Architecture Technologies

Ad hoc

Standardized

Formal

Federated

Executable

Personal computers and office tools

Templates,spreadsheets

Case tools, taxonomies

XML data exchange, web-based

repositories, RDF/S

OWL, web

services, SWRL,

agents

The Evolution of the EA Solution SpaceThe Evolution of the EA Solution Space

TopSCAPE™ Semantic EA PlatformTopSCAPE™ Semantic EA Platform

FEA and BMMP

Ontology Models

Reason

er

SMA

Metadata Graph DB

SMAEA

Query Engine

Vis

ualizati

on

Cach

e

Tri

ple

Sto

re

Data AccessR

ep

ort

G

en

era

tor

Collab

ora

tio

n

Kn

ow

led

ge

Pro

vis

ion

ing

Serv

ices

TopSCAPE

Fed

era

tion

Content Manager

Sch

em

as

Con

ten

t

Tem

pla

tes

Access

Translators

Imp

ort

Exp

ort

Valid

ato

r

ESB

SMA

Popkin

MDF

CASE tools, eg:

Popkin

Imp

act

An

aly

zer

Sim

ula

tors

Tra

nsla

tors

Decis

ion

S

up

port

Bu

dg

et

Man

ag

er

Port

folio

Man

ag

er

Tools Services

Data Access

DS

L E

ng

ines

Imp

ort

Exp

ort

For people, it can answer questions like:– Who is using what business systems to do what?– Who is using what technologies and products to do what? – What systems and business processes will be affected if we

upgrade a software package?– What technologies are supporting a given business process?– Where components are being re-used or could be re-used?– Who can we partner with at our agency and other agencies?– How is our agency architecture aligned with the FEA?– How new technologies (ie; XML, Web, Security) are being

taken up at our agency and at other agencies? Are they mature enough for e-government?

– … For applications, using an SOA, it can provide “An

Active Enterprise Architecture”, that is “Consultable” “Executable”

What can a Semantic Enterprise Architecture do?What can a Semantic Enterprise Architecture do?

The power of semantic technology for EA: The power of semantic technology for EA: Revealing Knowledge through InferencingRevealing Knowledge through Inferencing

Application provides CapabilityCapability enables CapabilityCapability supports Activity

Activity realizes IntentIntent isGoalOf Mission

enables is a Transitive Propertyprovides isSubPropertyOf enablessupports isSubPropertyOf enables

Given a capability and how it enables others, we can infer what activities it supports, how it realizes intent and the goals of the mission

TivoliPolicyDirector provides AuthenticationAuthentication enables SecureAccess

SecureAccess supports MissionOperations

TivoliPolicyDirector enables MissionOperations

The power of semantic technology for EA: Achieving The power of semantic technology for EA: Achieving Aggregation through FederationAggregation through Federation

Enterprise Architecture is a “System of

Systems”

What else becomes possible once a What else becomes possible once a semantic foundation has been built?semantic foundation has been built?

• New value propositions and new categories of applications

• Examples:

– NASA: Semantic Simulation-Based Acquisition (SBA)

– NASA: Semantic Collaborative Engineering Environment

– NASA: Semantic Command and Control– Federal Government: Semantic FEA-RMO Registry

Semantic Simulation-Based AcquisitionSemantic Simulation-Based Acquisition

Assessment and Trades

At the front-end of the systems acquisition lifecycle:

Pro

posa

ls

Sco

pe A

nnota

te

Valid

ate

NEXiOM Models•feedback re. quality•feedback re. IDTs

•feedback re. relevancefor strategic planning,capital planning, risk

management and partnering

Discipline-Based Tooling

Decisions and recommendations for

improvement

Ontology-based

ProposalRepository

Proposal Assessment

Onto

logy-B

ase

d Im

port

C. Potential for reuse of technologies and components

A. Program area supported?

B. Assess performance, risk and cost across disciplines?

D. Synergies for partnering

Semantic Collaborative Environment ArchitectureSemantic Collaborative Environment Architecture

Platform Infrastructure

Workgroup Enablement

Virtual Project Room

Realtime Collaboration

Alerts

Member Awareness

Workspace

Social Networks

Meetings

Roles

Work Settings

Choreography

Artifacts

Application Sharing

Activities

Tools

Tools Registry

WhiteboardDecision Support

EditorsQuery Manager

Knowledge Enablement

Ontology Registry

ArchivalCase Library

CategorizationSearch

Graphics3D-Engine2D-Engine GIS

Event Management TimelinesCalendar

Semantic InfrastructureSemantic Engine

p2p Metadata ReplicatorRSS

Triple Store Remote Sync

Eclipse JXTA

JENA

Semantic Blogs

Semantic Command and Control:Semantic Command and Control:Conceptual ArchitectureConceptual Architecture

Collaborative Mission Control

Knowledge Base

Semantic Engine

SCCE Capabilities

Launch Data Bus

NASA Networks

NASA Grid

Semantic Federal Enterprise ArchitectureSemantic Federal Enterprise Architecture

Business Reference Model (BRM)• Lines of Business• Agencies, Customers, Partners

Service Component Reference Model (SRM)• Service Layers, Service Types• Components, Access and Delivery Channels

Technical Reference Model (TRM)• Service Component Interfaces, Interoperability• Technologies, Recommendations

Data Reference Model (DRM)• Business-focused data standardization • Cross-Agency Information exchanges

Performance Reference Model (PRM)

• Government-wide Performance Measures & Outcomes• Line of Business-Specific Performance Measures & Outcomes

Federal Enterprise Architecture (FEA)

Busin

ess-D

riven A

ppro

ach

(Citize

n-C

ente

red Fo

cus)

Com

ponent-B

ase

d A

rchite

cture

s

FEA-RMO: The FEA Reference Model OntologyFEA-RMO: The FEA Reference Model Ontology

In 2004, TopQuadrant were contracted by GSA to develop an ontology of the FEA

FEA-RMO is a modular framework:– FEA Core– FEA BRM– FEA PRM– FEA SRM– FEA TRM– FEA DRM– BRM – PRM Bridge

Agency extensions:– Agency template– DoD extensions (connections to DODAF)– FAA extensions

Using Ontologies,Using Ontologies,FEA-RMO delivers “Line of Sight”FEA-RMO delivers “Line of Sight”

fea: Mission

fea: intentOf

fea: Agency

fea:undertakesfea: SubFunction

fea: hasIntent

brm: allignedWith

fea: IT Initiative

srm: developstrm: Technology

fea: ValuePoint

srm: Component

srm: allignedWith

prm: providesValue

prm: recivesValue

prm: hasPerformance prm: Performance

prm:measuredBy

prm: OperationalizedMeasureme

ntIndicator

srm:accessedThrough

srm: runsOn

……

rdfs:subClassOf

rdfs:subPropertyOf

fea: Customerfea: Process

Other relationships

FEA RMO Component – partial viewFEA RMO Component – partial view

Towards “Executable EA”:Towards “Executable EA”:‘InformationExchange” in DODAF Ontology‘InformationExchange” in DODAF Ontology

An Envisioned Semantic FEA Solution:An Envisioned Semantic FEA Solution:OMB and Agency Budget Proposal SystemOMB and Agency Budget Proposal System

Identify Proposal

C. Potential for reuse of Technologies/Components

A. Business Area and LOB supported?

B. Number of proposals with same capabilities?

Provide Feedback

C. Risk management feedback

A. Quality and reuse-of and reuse-for opportunities

B. Strategy and capital planning feedback

D. Recommendations for improvement and partnering

Assess Proposal

C. Refine Potential for reuse of Technologies/Components

A. Assess scope and context

B. Validate proposal against FEA-RMO models

D. Synergies for partnering

Proposal Budget

Repository

Knowledge Base:

FEA-RMO

Proposal Metrics and

Policies

ProposedBusiness Case

Assessment down from 3 months to 7 weeks

Re-submit period up from 1 week to 6 weeks - allowing time for collaborations to be negotiated

Submission Feedback

Towards TopScape: Semantic FEA RegistryTowards TopScape: Semantic FEA Registry

Current CapabilitiesCurrent Capabilities

Agency-specific extensions– Replacements, additions, deletions while preserving

traceability

– Architected for interoperability

Component Registry, describing components:– Business process support according to the BRM and

the SRM

– Performance measurements according to the PRM

– Technology platforms and use according to the TRM

Merge, federation and query Analytics and reporting

Future WorkFuture Work

Completing FEA-RMO with revisions to DRM More reports, visual query Using Ontologies for a Semantic Enterprise

Service Bus– Applying FEA-RMO to service provisioning– Semantics-Driven translation between EDOC and

BPEL– Smart ESB

Using OWL-S for Services Composition and Composite Applications

Take-Away PointsTake-Away Points

Semantic Technology is here and now Growing number of vendors with different approaches,

capabilities and maturity – technology selection is key With the Semantic Web standards rich models (ontologies)

can be federated and re-used across applications Key capabilities are:

– Integration of disparate data sources– Application interoperability– Business – IT alignment– Knowledge Management – sharing, reuse, terminology

reconciliation – Service discovery and composition – Agile enterprise

Semantic modeling is not the same as object or data modeling, so skills need to be developed

and we are not aloneand we are not alone

WebServices Journal, Dec 2004,– “Was the Universal Service Registry a Dream?

A combination of the features in UDDI and RDF may just make the dream come true” by: Fred Hartman; Harris Reynolds, BEA

“… Combining the capabilities of the current state of UDDI with the capabilities of RDF and OWL promises to resurrect the quest for the Universal Service Registry…"

http://webservices.sys-con.com/read/47278.htm

April, 2005 interview with the chief architect of Software AG

– “We recently announced the first globally available information integration product (called Enterprise Information Integrator v2.1) to incorporate Semantic Web technology. So my expectation is that you will see us using three core sets of standards and specifications as key components of our technology strategy: XML, WS-* and the Semantic Web Standards such as OWL."

ReferencesReferences

BMMP Business Enterprise Architecture (BEA) March 31, 2005 Update– http://www.dod.mil/comptroller/bmmp/products/architec

ture/BEA_3_31_05/iwp/default.htm Dean Allemang, Irene Polikoff, Ralph Hodgson, Paul

Keller, Jason Duley and Paul Chang: “COVE – Collaborative Ontology Visualization and Evolution”, IEEE Aerospace Conference, Montana, 2005– http://www.aeroconf.org/aeroupload/finishedpdf/F1458_

2.pdf Jim Cockrell and Ralph Hodgson, “"Proposed Wire

Data Management System Improvements for Space Shuttle Orbiter Ground Operations“, 8th Joint NASA, FAA, DOD Conference on Aging Aircraft, Palm Springs, CA, 31st January – 3rd February 2005,– http://www.jcaa.us/AA_Conference2005/Wiring/Ses40/40

_1100_Cockrell.pdf TopQuadrant White Paper on FEA-RMO, 2/21/2005

– http://www.topquadrant.com/tq_ea_solutions.htm

Books on Semantic Technology - 1Books on Semantic Technology - 1

Dieter Fensel, Wolfgang Wahlster, Henry Lieberman, James Hendler (Eds.): “Spinning the Semantic Web: Bringing the World Wide Web to Its Full Potential”, MIT Press, 2002

John Davies, Dieter Fensel & Frank van Harmelen:, “Towards the Semantic WEB – Ontology Driven Knowledge Management”, John Wiley, 2002

Johan Hjelm, “Creating the Semantic Web with RDF”, John Wiley, 2001

Dieter Fensel: “Ontologies: A Silver Bullet for Knowledge Management and Electronic Commerce”, Springer Verlag, 2001

Sheller Powers, “Practical RDF”, O’Reilly, 2003

Michael C. Daconta, Leo J. Obrst, Kevin T. Smith: “The Semantic Web: A Guide to the Future of XML, Web Services, and Knowledge Management”, John Wiley, 2003

Vladimir Geroimenko (Editor), Chaomei Chen (Editor), “Visualizing the Semantic Web”, Springer-Verlag, 2003

M. Klein and B. Omelayenko (eds.), “Knowledge Transformation for the Semantic Web”, Vol. 95, Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, IOS Press, 2003

Books on Semantic Technology - 2Books on Semantic Technology - 2

Thomas B. Passin, "Explorer's Guide to the Semantic Web", ISBN 1932394206, June 2004

Jeff Pollock and Ralph Hodgson,

"Adaptive Information: Improving Business Through Semantic Interoperability, Grid Computing, and Enterprise Integration“, John Wiley, September 2004

Grigoris Antoniou and Frank van Harmelen, “A Semantic Web Primer”, The MIT Press, April 2004

Lee W. Lacy, “OWL: Representing Information Using the Web Ontology Language”, Trafford Publishing, 2005

AnnexAnnex

Ontology-Based EA Registry: TopSCAPE-EAOntology-Based EA Registry: TopSCAPE-EAFEA and DOD extensionsFEA and DOD extensions

Select either FEA Ontology or Agency-Specific Ontologies

Service specifications with links to more details

Search over all models for concepts

Demonstration at www.topquadrant.com/EAworld/index.htm

TopSCAPE-EA:TopSCAPE-EA:Search Example – “Quality”Search Example – “Quality”

Search results show FEA path

Demonstration at www.topquadrant.com/EAworld/index.htm

TopSCAPE-EATopSCAPE-EAExample of DOD extensions to FEAExample of DOD extensions to FEA

Agency-specific extensions shown “green”

Hot links to TRM areas

Mapping Components to the FEA Models - 1Mapping Components to the FEA Models - 1

Available elements from merged reference models

Mapping Components to the FEA Models - 2Mapping Components to the FEA Models - 2

Mapping Components to the FEA Models - 3Mapping Components to the FEA Models - 3

EA Analyst – Extension ReportEA Analyst – Extension Report

EA Analyst – Comparison ReportEA Analyst – Comparison Report

EA Analyst – Initiatives ReportEA Analyst – Initiatives Report

Example of Exporting OWL: FAAExample of Exporting OWL: FAA

<?xml version="1.0" ?>

- <rdf:RDF xmlns:fea="http://www.osera.gov/owl/2004/11/fea/fea#" xmlns:srm="http://www.osera.gov/owl/2004/11/fea/srm#" xmlns:ns1="http://www.topquadrant.com/owl/2005/03/fea/faasrm#" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:rdfs="http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#" xmlns:owl="http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#">

- <owl:Ontology rdf:about="http://www.topquadrant.com/owl/2005/03/fea/faasrm">

<owl:imports rdf:resource="http://www.osera.gov/owl/2004/11/fea/srm" />

</owl:Ontology>

- <srm:BusinessComponentSystem rdf:about="http://www.topquadrant.com/owl/2005/03/fea/faasrm#AirTrafficCRU-X_System">

<fea:mnemonic rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string">CRU-X</fea:mnemonic>

<srm:realizes rdf:resource="http://www.osera.gov/owl/2004/11/fea/srm#TimeReporting" />

<srm:usedBy rdf:resource="http://www.osera.gov/owl/2004/11/fea/brm#FederalAviationAdministration" />

<ns1:hasDeploymentStatus rdf:resource="http://www.topquadrant.com/owl/2005/03/fea/faasrm#CommissionedInitalDeployment" />

<rdfs:label rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string">Air Traffic CRU-X System</rdfs:label>

</srm:BusinessComponentSystem>

…

…