SemanticGov WSMO, WSML and WSMX Seminar
-
Upload
evan-mills -
Category
Documents
-
view
42 -
download
0
description
Transcript of SemanticGov WSMO, WSML and WSMX Seminar
www.semantic-gov.org
SemanticGov WSMO, WSML and WSMX Seminar
Tomas Vitvar, Holger Lausen, Adrian Mocan, Tomas Haselwanter, Michal Zaremba
SemanticGov WSMO/L/X Seminar6-7 April 2006, Innsbruck
2www.semantic-gov.org
Agenda
09.00-10.30 Semantic Web Services and WSMO Tomas Vitvar (DERI Galway)
10.30-11.00 Coffee Break
11.00-11.30 Web Service Modeling Language (WSML) Holger Lausen (DERI Innsbruck)
11.30-12.30 Semantic Web Services Techniques
(Discovery, Invocation, Mediation)
Adrian Mocan (DERI Innsbruck)
12.30-14.00 Lunch Break
14.00-15.00 WSMX – Principles, Architecture and Implementation Adrian Mocan (DERI Innsbruck)
15.00-15.30 Coffee Break
15.30-16.00WSMO/L/X Tools Adrian Mocan (DERI Innsbruck)
Marin Dimitrov (Ontotext)
16.00-17.00 Demos/Hands-on Session Adrian Mocan (DERI Innsbruck)
Thomas Haselwanter (DERI Innsbruck)
www.semantic-gov.org
<Semantic Web Services and WSMO>
Tomas Vitvar
4www.semantic-gov.org
Overview
• Introduction to Semantic Web Services• Web Service Modeling Ontology
5www.semantic-gov.org
500 million user
more than 3 billion pages
Static WWWURI, HTML, HTTP
Semantic Web and Web Services
6www.semantic-gov.org
Static WWWURI, HTML, HTTP
Serious Problems inSerious Problems ininformation finding,information finding,information extracting,information extracting,Information representing,Information representing,information interpreting and information interpreting and information maintaining.information maintaining.
Semantic WebRDF, RDF(S), OWL
Semantic Web and Web Services
7www.semantic-gov.org
Static WWWURI, HTML, HTTP
Bringing the Bringing the computer back computer back as a device for as a device for computationcomputation
Semantic WebRDF, RDF(S), OWL
Dynamic Web ServicesUDDI, WSDL, SOAP
Semantic Web and Web Services
8www.semantic-gov.org
Static WWWURI, HTML, HTTP
Bringing Bringing the Web the Web to its full to its full potentialpotential
Semantic WebRDF, RDF(S), OWL
Dynamic Web ServicesUDDI, WSDL, SOAP
Intelligent WebServices
Semantic Web and Web Services
9www.semantic-gov.org
• The next generation of the WWW
• Information has machine-processable and machine-understandable semantics
• Not a separate Web but an augmentation of the current one
• Ontologies as basic building block
Semantic Web
10www.semantic-gov.org
Formal, explicit specification of a shared conceptualization
commonly accepted understanding
conceptual model of a domain
(ontological theory)
unambiguous terminology definitions
machine-readability with computational
semantics
Semantic Web – Ontology Definition
11www.semantic-gov.org
Concept – Conceptual entity of a domain
Property – Attributes describing a concept
Relation – Relationships between concepts or properties
Axiom – Coherency description between Concepts / Properties / Relations using logical expressions
Person
Student Professor
Lecture
isA – hierarchy (taxonomy)
name email
numberresearch
field
topiclecture
nr.
attends holds
holds(Professor, Lecture) =>Lecture.topic = Professor.researchField
Semantic Web – Ontology Example
12www.semantic-gov.org
• Ontology Languages:– expressivity – reasoning support – web compliance
• Ontology Reasoning: – large scale knowledge handling – stable & scalable inference machines
• Ontology Management Techniques: – editing and browsing – storage and retrieval – versioning and evolution Support
• Ontology Integration Techniques: – ontology mapping/aligning, merging
Semantic Web – Ontology Technology
13www.semantic-gov.org
• Loosely coupled, reusable components
• Encapsulate discrete functionality
• Distributed
• Accessible over standard internet protocols
• Add new level of functionality on top of the current web
Web Services
14www.semantic-gov.org
Web Services – Architecture
15www.semantic-gov.org
• Web Service Description Language • W3C effort, WSDL 2 final construction phase
Web Services – WSDL
16www.semantic-gov.org
• Universal Description, Discovery, and Integration Protocol • OASIS driven standardization effort• Information stored in UDDI
– White Pages– Name of Business, Contact Information– Description of the Company
– Yellow Pages– Business Classification Information– Based on NAICS, or Geographical Index– List of Products (multiple entries)
– Green Pages– Technical Information about services– Example: business processes, binding info, etc.
Web Services – UDDI
17www.semantic-gov.org
• Simple Object Access Protocol • W3C Recommendation • XML Data Transport
– Sender <-> receiver– Protocol Binding– Communication Aspects– Messages – content
Web Services – SOAP
18www.semantic-gov.org
• Only Syntactical Information Descriptions– Syntactic support for discovery, composition and execution– Web Service usage and integration needs to be supported
manually
• No Semantic mark-up for content and services• No support for Semantic Web
Web Services – Difficulties
19www.semantic-gov.org
Semantic Web Technology
+
Web Service Technology
=> Semantic Web Services as integrated solution for realizing the vision of the next generation of the Web
• allow machine supported data interpretation• ontologies as data model
• messaging, invocation of services• security, etc.
Semantic Web Services
20www.semantic-gov.org
• Service Model – framework for description of Web Services and related aspects
• Ontologies as Information Model – support ontologies and make use of ontology languages for definition of underlying information model
• Define semantically driven techniques for total or partial automation of the web service execution process
Semantic Web Services
21www.semantic-gov.org
• Publication – Make the description of a Web service available on the Web
• Discovery – Detect suitable services for a solving given task
• Selection – Choose the most appropriate services among the suitable ones
according to user’s preferences
• Composition– Combine more services to achieve a goal
• Mediation – Solve mismatches (data, protocol, process) among different
services
Semantic Web Services – Execution Process (1)
22www.semantic-gov.org
• Invocation– Invoke services according to consumption interface and
programmatic conventions
• Monitoring– Control and monitor the execution process
• Compensation– Provide transactional support (i.e. commit/rollback)
• Replacement– Facilitate the substitution of services by equivalent ones
• Auditing– Verify that service execution occurred in the expected way
Semantic Web Services – Execution Process (2)
23www.semantic-gov.org
Overview
• Introduction to Semantic Web Services• Web Service Modelling Ontology
24www.semantic-gov.org
• WSMO defines conceptual model for Semantic Web Services– Ontology of core elements for Semantic Web Services – Formally defined using WSML language– Derived from the Web Service Modelling Framework (WSMF)
• WSMO defines requirements for Web Service Modelling Language (WSML)
• WSMO defines framework for architecture and execution environment (WSMX)
• WSMO is developed as part of ESSI cluster
WSMO – Scope
25www.semantic-gov.org
A Conceptual Model for SWS
A Formal Language for WSMO
A Rule-based Language for SWS
Execution Environment for WSMO
WSMO – Working Groups
26www.semantic-gov.org
• Web Compliance • Ontology-Based • Goal-driven • Strict Decoupling • Centrality of Mediation • Description versus Implementation • Execution Semantics
WSMO – Design Principles
27www.semantic-gov.org
Objectives that a client wants toachieve by using Web Services
Provide the formally specified terminologyof the information used by all other components
Semantic description of Web Services: - Capability (functional)- Interfaces (usage)
Connectors between components with mediation facilities for handling heterogeneities
WSMO D2, version 1.2, 13 April 2005 (W3C submission)
WSMO – Top Level Elements
28www.semantic-gov.org
• Every WSMO elements is described by properties that contain non-functional aspects of web services
• Dublin Core Metadata Set– Used for resource management
• Versioning Information– Evolution support
• Quality of Service Information– Availability of services, reliability
• Other – Owner, financial aspects, etc.
Non-Functional Properties
29www.semantic-gov.org
Dublin Core Metadata Contributor Coverage Creator Description Format Identifier Language Publisher Relation Rights Source Subject Title Type
Quality of Service Accuracy NetworkRelatedQoSPerformanceReliability RobustnessScalability Security Transactional Trust
Other Financial Owner TypeOfMatch Version
List of Non-functional Properties
30www.semantic-gov.org
Provide the formally specified terminologyof the information used by all other components Semantic description of Web
Services: - Capability (functional)- Interfaces (usage)
Connectors between components with mediation facilities for handling heterogeneities
Objectives that a client wants toachieve by using Web Services
WSMO Ontologies
31www.semantic-gov.org
• Ontologies are used as the ‘data model’ throughout WSMO – all WSMO element descriptions rely on ontologies– all data interchanged in Web Service usage are ontologies– Ontology reasoning and semantic information processing
• WSMO Ontology Language WSML– conceptual syntax for describing WSMO elements – logical language for axiomatic expressions (WSML Layering)
• WSMO Ontology Design
– Modularization: import / re-using ontologies, modular approach for ontology design
– De-Coupling: heterogeneity handled by OO Mediators
WSMO Ontologies – usage and design principles
32www.semantic-gov.org
• Non functional properties• Imported Ontologies
– importing existing ontologies where no heterogeneities arise
• Used mediators – OO Mediators (ontology import with terminology mismatch handling)
• Ontology Elements:– Concepts – set of concepts that belong to the ontology, incl.– Attributes – set of attributes that belong to a concept– Relations – define interrelations between several concepts– Functions – special type of relation– Instances – set of instances that belong to the represented ontology– Axioms – axiomatic expressions in ontology (logical statement)
Ontology Specification
33www.semantic-gov.org
WSMO Web Services
Provide the formally specified terminologyof the information used by all other components Semantic description of Web
Services: - Capability (functional)- Interfaces (usage)
Connectors between components with mediation facilities for handling heterogeneities
Objectives that a client wants toachieve by using Web Services
34www.semantic-gov.org
WSMO Web Service Description
Web ServiceImplementation(not of interest in Web Service Description)
Choreography --- Service Interfaces ---
Capability
functional description
WS
WS
- Advertising of Web Service- Support for WS Discovery
client-service interaction interface for consuming WS - External Visible Behavior- Communication Structure - ‘Grounding’
realization of functionality by aggregating other Web Services - functional decomposition - interaction with aggregated WS
Non-functional Properties
DC + QoS + Version + financial
- Complete item description- Quality aspects
WS
Orchestration
35www.semantic-gov.org
WSMO Web Service – Capability Specification
• Non functional properties, Imported Ontologies, Used mediators
• Preconditions – what a web service expects in order to be able to provide its
service (conditions over the input)• Assumptions
– conditions on the state of the world that has to hold before the Web Service can be executed
• Postconditions – Describes the result of the Web Service in relation to the
input, and conditions on it• Effects
– conditions on the state of the world that hold after execution of the Web Service (i.e. changes in the state of the world)
36www.semantic-gov.org
WSMO Web Service – Interface Specification
• Service Interface – consumption and interaction – Choreography and Orchestration – described as sub-
elements of WSMO Web Service Interface• Choreography
– External Visible Behaviour of a Web Service– Aspects of the workflow of a Web Service where Interaction is
required • Communication Structure – messages sent and received and
order of messages
• Orchestration– Decomposition of Web Service functionality– Interaction with aggregated web services
37www.semantic-gov.org
WSMO Web Service – Interface Specification
• Description Requirements– Dynamics of information interchange
• Formal Framework – Abstract State Machines (ASM)• core principles: state-based, state definition by formal algebra,
guarded transitions for state changes• Reasoning on Web Service Interfaces (validation of
conversation)• Mediation support on Web Service interfaces (i.e. process
mediation)– Ontologies – underlying data model– Grounding – executable underlying communication
technology for interaction
38www.semantic-gov.org
• VTA example:
• Choreography = how to interact with the service to consume its functionality • Orchestration = how service functionality is achieved by aggregating other Web
Services
VTAService
Date
Time
Flight, Hotel
Error
Confirmation
Hotel Service
Flight Service
Date, Time
Hotel
Error
Date, Time
Flight
Error
When the service is requested
When the service requests
Choreography and Orchestration – Example
39www.semantic-gov.org
Service Interface Description Model – ASM
• Vocabulary Ω: – ontology schema(s) used in service interface description – usage for information interchange: in, out, shared, controlled
• States ω(Ω): – a stable status in the information space – defined by attribute values of ontology instances
• Guarded Transition GT(ω): – state transition – general structure: if (condition) then (action) – additional constructs: add, delete, update
40www.semantic-gov.org
Service Interface Example
Ωin hasValues concept A [ att1 ofType X att2 ofType Y]…
a memberOf A [ att1 hasValue x att2 hasValue y]
a memberOf A [ att1 hasValue x, att2 hasValue y]
b memberOf B [ att2 hasValue m]
IF (a memberOf A [ att1 hasValue x ])THEN (b memberOf B [ att2 hasValue m ])
State ω1 Guarded Transition GT(ω1) State ω2
Ωout hasValues concept B [ att1 ofType W att2 ofType Z]…
Vocabulary: - Concept A in Ωin - Concept B in Ωout
Received instance a Sent instance b
41www.semantic-gov.org
WSMO Goals
Provide the formally specified terminologyof the information used by all other components
Semantic description of Web Services: - Capability (functional)- Interfaces (usage)
Connectors between components with mediation facilities for handling heterogeneities
Objectives that a client wants toachieve by using Web Services
42www.semantic-gov.org
• Ontological De-coupling of Requester and Provider • Goal-driven Architetcure:
– requester formulates objective independently – ‘intelligent’ mechanisms detect suitable services for solving the
Goal– allows re-use of Services for different purposes
• Derived from different AI-approaches for intelligent systems
– Intelligent Agents (BDI Architectures) – Problem Solving Methods
• Requests may in principle not be satisfiable• Ontological relationships & mediators used to link goals to
web services
WSMO Goal
43www.semantic-gov.org
WSMO Goal Specification
• Non functional properties, Imported Ontologies, Used mediators
• Requested Capability – describes service functionality expected to resolve the
objective – defined as capability description from the requester
perspective • Requested Interface
– describes communication behaviour supported by the requester for consuming a Web Service (Choreography)
44www.semantic-gov.org
WSMO Mediators
Provide the formally specified terminologyof the information used by all other components
Semantic description of Web Services: - Capability (functional)- Interfaces (usage)
Connectors between components with mediation facilities for handling heterogeneities
Objectives that a client wants toachieve by using Web Services
45www.semantic-gov.org
WSMO Mediators
• Heterogeneity … – Mismatches on structural / semantic / process levels – Occur between different components that shall interoperate– Especially in distributed & open environments like the Internet
• Concept of Mediation: – Mediators as components that resolve mismatches– Mediation cannot be always fully automated– Several types of mediators defined by WSMO
• OOMediators, WWMediators, GGMediators, WGMediators
46www.semantic-gov.org
WSMO Mediators – Overview
47www.semantic-gov.org
WSMO Mediator
uses a Mediation Service via
Source Component
Source Component
TargetComponent 1 .. n
1
Mediation Services
- as a Goal
WSMO Mediators – General Approach
48www.semantic-gov.org
OO MediatorMediation Service
Train ConnectionOntology (s1)
Purchase Ontology (s2)
Train Ticket Purchase Ontology
Mediation Services
Goal:“merge s1, s2 and s1.ticket subclassof s2.product”
Discovery
Merging 2 ontologies
WSMO OO Mediator – Example
49www.semantic-gov.org
• Aim:– Support specification of Goals by re-using existing Goals – Allow definition of Goal Ontologies (collection of pre-defined
Goals)– Terminology mismatches handled by OO Mediators
• Example: Goal Refinement
GG MediatorMediation Service
Source Goal“Buy a ticket”
Target Goal “Buy a Train Ticket”
postcondition: “aTicket memberof trainticket”
WSMO GG Mediator
50www.semantic-gov.org
• WG Mediators:– link a Web Service to a Goal and resolve occurring mismatches – match Web Service and Goals that do not match a priori– broader range of Goals solvable by a Web Service
• WW Mediators:– enable interoperability of heterogeneous Web Services– support automated collaboration between Web Services – OO Mediators for terminology import with data level mediation– Process Mediation for making Business Processes interoperable
WG and WW Mediators
51www.semantic-gov.org
• Other Frameworks/approaches to SWS– OWL-S
• Ontology and Language to describe SWS• Strong relation with Semantic Web and Web Services• No explicit notion of mediatiors (mediation is a by-product of orchestration
process)– WSDL-S
• Semantic Annotations for WSDL– IRS
• Internet Reasoning Service• Recently based on WSMO model
• Standardization– OASIS SEE TC
• Standardization of architecture– W3C
• Semantic Annotations for Web Services WG• Rule Interchange Format WG• W3C Submissions: WSMO/L/X, OWL-S, WSDL-S
Related Work
www.semantic-gov.org
</Semantic Web Services and WSMO>
Question and Answers
www.semantic-gov.org
<Web Service Modeling Language>
Holger Lausen
54www.semantic-gov.org
Agenda
• Overview of Semantic Web Languages• Inferences in OWL DL• Introduction to Web Service Modeling Language• Demo
55www.semantic-gov.org
Ontology Languages in the Semantic Web
The (in)famous layer cake(s)
56www.semantic-gov.org
Ontology Languages in the Semantic Web
• Dimensions to consider– Layering between languages– Modeling Style / Epistemology – Expressiveness– Reasoning support (e.g. Query Answering vs. Entailment)– Assumptions built into language, e.g.
• Unique Names vs. Not Unique Names Assumption
• Open vs. Closed World Semantics
57www.semantic-gov.org
Layer Cake 2000
Tim Berners Lee, XML Conference, 2000
58www.semantic-gov.org
Layer Cake 2005
Tim Berners Lee, International Semantic Web Conference, 2005
59www.semantic-gov.org
Simplified Stack (from a logicians point of view)
Description Logic Programming
Description Logic Logic Programming
FOL++
60www.semantic-gov.org
Inferences in OWL DL
61www.semantic-gov.org
OWL - Language
• Three species of OWL– OWL full is union of OWL syntax and RDF
– OWL DL restricted to DL fragment (¼ DAML+OIL)
– OWL Lite is “simpler” subset of OWL DL
• Semantic layering– OWL DL ¼ OWL full within DL fragment
• OWL DL based on SHIQ Description Logic• OWL DL Benefits from many years of DL research
– Well defined semantics
– Formal properties well understood (complexity, decidability)
– Known reasoning algorithms
– Implemented systems (highly optimised)
62www.semantic-gov.org
OWL by Example – Subsumption Reasoning
• Class(BusDriver complete intersectionOf(Person restriction(drives someValuesFrom (Bus))))
• Class(Bus partial Vehicle)• Class(Driver complete intersectionOf(Person
restriction(drives someValuesFrom (Vehicle))))
• A bus driver is a person that drives a bus• A bus is a vehicle• A driver is a person that drives a vehicle
Class(Driver partial BusDriver)
Taken from (includes many other DL inferences) http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~horrocks/Teaching/cs646/Slides/why.ppt
63www.semantic-gov.org
OWL by Example – (not) Unique Names / Equality Reasoning
• ObjectProperty(hasPassenger domain(FlightSeat) range(Passenger))
• Class(FlightSeat partial restriction(hasPassenger maxCardinality(1)))
• Individual(seat1 type(FlightSeat) value(hasPassenger Mary) value(hasPassenger John))
• A flight seat represents the seats in a particular flight. The property has passenger associates a seat in a flight with a passenger.
• A seat may only have one passenger, which is guaranteed by the restriction maxCardinality(1).
• The individual seat1 is an instance of flight seat; seat1 has two values for the property has passenger, namely Mary and John.
john = mary
64www.semantic-gov.org
OWL by Example – Type Inferences
• ObjectProperty(hasPassenger domain(FlightSeat) range(Passenger))
• Individual(seat1 type(FlightSeat))• Individual(seat2 type(FlightSeat)
value(hasPassenger seat1))
• A flight seat represents the seats in a particular flight. The property has passenger associates a flight seat (domain) with a passenger (range).
• seat1 is a flight seat• seat 2 is a flight seat and has a passernger named seat1
Individual(seat3 type(Passenger)
65www.semantic-gov.org
OWL Summary
• Good For Classification / Bad for Instance Retrieval• Open World Assumption• Non Unique Name Assumption• Classical Logic
– Description Logic
– Monotonic Logic
– decidability/tractability properties
– it is the fragment of logic that can be computationally explored around the existential quantifier.
• No support for data type predicates (+,-,*,/)• No support for meta modeling (OWL DL)• Only unary and binary predicates• Layering (Lite / DL) not really justified
66www.semantic-gov.org
Web Service Modeling Language
67www.semantic-gov.org
• Aim – to provide a language (or a set of interoperable languages) for representing the elements of WSMO:– Ontologies, Web services, Goals, Mediators
• WSML provides a formal language for the conceptual elements of WSMO, based on:– Description Logics– Logic Programming– First-Order Logic– Frame Logic
Web Service Modeling Language (WSML)
68www.semantic-gov.org
Variants of WSML
69www.semantic-gov.org
WSML-Core
• Basic interoperability layer between Description Logics and Logic Programming paradigms
• Based on Description Logic Programs– Expressive intersection of Description Logic SHIQ and Datalog– Allows to take advantage of many years of established research
in Databases and Logic Programming– Allows reuse of existing efficient Deductive Database and Logic
programming reasoners
• Some limitations in conceptual modeling of Ontologies– No cardinality constraints– Only “inferring” range of attributes– No meta-modeling
70www.semantic-gov.org
WSML-DL
• Extension of WSML-Core• Based on the Description Logic SHIQ
– Entailment is decidable– Close to DL species of Web Ontology Language OWL– Many efficient subsumption reasoners
• Some limitations in conceptual modeling of Ontologies– No cardinality constraints– Only “inferring” range of attributes– No meta-modeling
• Limitations in logical expressions– From Logic Programming point-of-view, there is a lack of:
• N-ary predicates• Chaining variables over predicates• (Default) negation
71www.semantic-gov.org
WSML-Flight
• Extension of WSML-Core• Based on the Datalog,
– Ground entailment is decidable– Allows to take advantage of many years of established research
in Databases and Logic Programming– Allows reuse of existing efficient Deductive Database and Logic
programming reasoners
• No limitations in conceptual modeling of Ontologies– Cardinality constraints– Value constraints for attributes– Meta-modeling
72www.semantic-gov.org
WSML-Rule
• Extension of WSML-Flight; based on Horn fragment of F-Logic• Ground entailment is undecidable• Turing complete• Allows to take advantage of many years of established research in
Logic Programming• Allows reuse of existing efficient Logic programming reasoners• Extends WSML-Flight logical expressions with:
– Function symbols– Unsafe rules
• From Description Logic point-of-view, there is a lack of:– Existentials– Disjunction– (Classical) negation– Equality
73www.semantic-gov.org
WSML-Full
• Extension of WSML-Rule and WSML-DL• Based on First Order Logic with nonmonotonic extensions• Entailment is undecidable• Very expressive• Extends WSML-DL logical expressions with:
– Chaining variables over predicates– Function symbols– Nonmonotonic negation– N-ary predicates
• Extends WSML-Rule with:– Existentials– Disjunction– Classical negation– Equality
• Specification of WSML-Full is open research issue
74www.semantic-gov.org
Demo
75www.semantic-gov.org
Online Reasoner
76www.semantic-gov.org
Resources
• http://www.wsmo.org/wsml/wsml-syntax – Specificiation, Tools, News
• Online Demos:– WSML Rule Reasoner
• http://tools.deri.org/wsml/rule-reasoner/• http://tools.deri.org/wsml/validator/
• Tools:– WSMO4J (API & reference implementation)
• http://wsmo4j.sourceforge.net/
– Reasoner:• WSML 2 Reasoner (can be used with several reasoners)
– http://dev1.deri.at/wsml2reasoner/
• MINS Reasoner (Datalog + negation + function symbols)– http://dev1.deri.at/mins/
www.semantic-gov.org
</Web Service Modeling Language>
Question and Answers
www.semantic-gov.org
<Semantic Web Services Techniques >
Adrian Mocan
79www.semantic-gov.org
SWS Challenges
• Dynamic (and automatic) Web services interoperation
• Techniques required for:– Discovery
• how are Web services found and selected?
– Composition• how to aggregate Web Services into a complex functionality?
– Conversation • how to ensure automated interaction of Web Services?
– Invocation• how to access and invoke Semantic Web Services?
– Mediation• how are data and protocol mismatches resolved?
• Systems for automated Web service usage :– Resource editing and management – Functional components – APIs, execution control, integrated & flexible architectures
80www.semantic-gov.org
Virtual Travel Agency Use Case
• Tomas is employed in DERI Galway and wants to book a flight and a hotel for the SemanticGov Seminar
• The start-up company VTA provides tourism and business travel services based on Semantic Web Service technology
• => how does the interplay of Tomas, VTA, and other Web Services
look like?
Michael
Flight Booking
Hotel Booking
uses & aggregates
Service Provider I
Service Provider II
provides
contract
contract
VTA
81www.semantic-gov.org
Domain Ontologies
• All terminology used in resource descriptions are based on ontologies and all information interchanged should be ontology instances
• Domain Ontologies needed for this Use Case: – Trip Reservation Ontology, Location Ontology, Date and Time Ontology,
Purchase Ontology, … possibly more
• Ontology Design for the Semantic Web – Real ontologies
– (re-)use existing, widely accepted ontologies
– Modular ontology design
– … is a very difficult and challenging task• determine agreed conceptualization of domain • correct formalization (e.g. misuse of is_a / part_of relations) • => requires expertise in knowledge engineering
82www.semantic-gov.org
“Trip Reservation” Ontology
• Defines the terminology for trips (traveling, accommodation, holiday / business travel facilities) and reservations
• Provided by community of interest (e.g. Austrian Tourism Association)
• Main concepts: – TRIP
• describes a trip (a journey between locations) • passenger, origin & destination, means of travel, etc.
– RESERVATION • describes reservations for tickets, accommodation, or complete trips • customer, trip, price, payment
– RESERVATION REQUEST / OFFER / CONFIRMATION
• Uses other ontologies: – Location Ontology for origin & destination specification – Date and Time Ontology for departure, arrival, duration information – Purchase Ontology for payment related aspects
83www.semantic-gov.org
Goal Description
• “Book flight and hotel for the SemanticGov Seminar for Tomas”
• Goal capability postcondition: get a trip reservation for this
goal _"http://www.wsmo.org/examples/goals/SemGovSem" importsOntology _"http://www.wsmo.org/ontologies/tripReservationOntology", … capability postcondition definedBy ?tripReservation memberOf tr#reservation[ customer hasValue fof#tomas, reservationItem hasValue ?tripSemGovSem] and ?tripSemGovSem memberOf tr#trip[ passenger hasValue fof#tomas, origin hasValue loc#galway, destination hasValue loc#innsbruck, meansOfTransport hasValue ?flight, accomodation hasValue ?hotel] and ?flight[airline hasValue tr#AerLingus] memberOf tr#flight and ?hotel[name hasValue “Hotel Innsbruck”] memberOf tr#hotel.
84www.semantic-gov.org
VTA Service Description
• Book tickets, hotels, amenities, etc. • Capability description (pre-state)
capability VTAcapability sharedVariables ?creditCard, ?initialBalance, ?item, ?passenger precondition definedBy ?reservationRequest[ reservationItem hasValue ?item, passenger hasValue ?passenger, payment hasValue ?creditcard, ] memberOf tr#reservationRequest and ((?item memberOf tr#trip) or (?item memberOf tr#ticket)) and ?creditCard[balance hasValue ?initialBalance] memberOf po#creditCard.
assumption definedBy
po#validCreditCard(?creditCard) and (?creditCard[type hasValue po#visa] or
?creditCard[type hasValue po#mastercard]).
85www.semantic-gov.org
VTA Service Description
• Capability description (post-state)
postcondition definedBy ?reservation[ reservationItem hasValue ?item, customer hasValue ?passenger, payment hasValue ?creditcard ] memberOf tr#reservation.
effect definedBy reservationPrice(?reservation, ?tripPrice) and ?finalBalance = (?initialBalance - ?ticketPrice) and ?creditCard[po#balance hasValue ?finalBalance].
86www.semantic-gov.org
Discovery
87www.semantic-gov.org
Web Service Discovery
Tomas Objective: „Book a flight and a hotel for me for the SemGovSem.“
Service Registry WS Discoverer
has
searchesVTA
result set includes
Goal definition
88www.semantic-gov.org
Discovery Techniques
• Different techniques available – Trade-off: ease-of-provision <-> accuracy – Resource descriptions & matchmaking algorithms
– Key Word Matching • match natural language key words in resource descriptions
– Controlled Vocabulary• ontology-based key word matching
– Semantic Matchmaking • … what Semantic Web Services aim at
Ease of provision
Possible A
ccuracy
89www.semantic-gov.org
Matchmaking Notions & Intentions
• Exact Match: – G, WS, O, M x. (G(x) <=> WS(x) )
• PlugIn Match: – G, WS, O, M x. (G(x) => WS(x) )
• Subsumption Match: – G, WS, O, M x. (G(x) <= WS(x) )
• Intersection Match: – G, WS, O, M x. (G(x) WS(x) )
• Non Match: – G, WS, O, M ¬x. (G(x) WS(x) )
= G = WS
X
Keller, U.; Lara, R.; Polleres, A. (Eds): WSMO Web Service Discovery. WSML Working Draft D5.1, 12 Nov 2004.
90www.semantic-gov.org
Discoverer Architecture
• Discovery as central Semantic Web Services technology
• Integrated Discoverer Architectures:
Resource Repository (UDDI or other)
Keyword-/ Classification-based Filtering
Controlled Vocabulary Filtering
Semantic Matchmaking
usable Web Service
efficient narrowing of search space (relevant services to be inspected)
retrieve ServiceDescriptions
invoke Web Service
91www.semantic-gov.org
Choreography in Discovery
Requested Interface (Chor)1) send request2) select from offer3) receive confirmation
Goal
defines
VTA
VTA WS ‘Trip Booking’
Capability
Interface (Chor.)1) get request2) provide offer 3) receive selection4) send confirmation
Interface (Orch.)1) flight request2) hotel request 3) book flight4) book hotel
Flight WS
Capability
Interface (Chor.)1) get request2) provide offer 3) receive selection4) send confirmation
Orch. ..
Hotel WS
Capability
Interface (Chor.)1) get request2) provide offer 3) receive selection4) send confirmation
Orch. ..
provides
Requested Capabilitybook flight & hotel
- both choreography interfaces given (“static”)- correct & complete consumption of VTA => existence of a valid MEP?
- VTA Orchestration & Chor. Interfaces of aggregated WS given=> existence of a valid MEP between VTA and each aggregated WS?
- Choreography in Discovery as a central reasoning task in Service Interfaces
92www.semantic-gov.org
internal business logic of
Web Service(not of interest in Service
Interface Description)
Choreography in Discovery
• A valid MEP exists if: – 1) Signature Compatibility
• homogeneous ontologies
• compatible in- and outputs
– 2) Behavior Compatibility• start state for interaction
• a termination state can be reached without any additional input
internal business logic of
Web Service(not of interest in Service
Interface Description)
93www.semantic-gov.org
Behavior Compatibility Example
ΩG(ωØ) = Ø
ΩG(ω1) = request(out)
ΩG(ω2a) = offer(in), changeReq(out)
if Ø then request ΩVTA(ωØ) = Ø
ΩVTA(ω1) = request(in), offer(out)
if request then offer
if cnd1(offer) then changeReq
ΩG(ω2b) = offer(in), order(out)
if cnd2(offer) then order
ΩVTA(ω2a) = changeReq(in),offer(out)
if changeReq then offer
ΩVTA(ω2b) = order(in), conf(out)
if order then conf
ΩG(ω3) = offer(in), conf(in)
if conf then Ø
Goal Behavior Interface VTA Behavior Interface
Start
ω2(C)
ω1(C)
ω3(C)
ω4(C)
Termination
valid MEP existent
94www.semantic-gov.org
Orchestration Validation Example
• Orchestration is valid if valid MEP exists for interactions between the orchestrating and each aggregated Web Service, done by choreography discovery
if Ø then (FWS, flightRequest) if request then offer
if order then confirmation
VTA Web Service Orchestration
Start (VTA, FWS)
Termination (VTA, FWS)
if flightOffer then (HWS, hotelRequest)
if selection then (FWS, flightBookingOrder)
if selection, flightBookingConf then (HWS, hotelBookingOrder)
Flight WS Behavior Interface
if request then offer
if order then confirmation
Hotel WS Behavior InterfaceStart
(VTA, HWS)
Termination (VTA, HWS)
95www.semantic-gov.org
Grounding
96www.semantic-gov.org
WSMO Grounding
• Motivation– It’s a WSDL and XML Schema world
• Background– XML, XML Schema, what’s been done before
• Approaches to data grounding– Three possible approaches, one chosen
• Creating the mappings– Methodology, identifying mappings, next steps
• Grounding WSMO Choreography
97www.semantic-gov.org
Motivation
• Web services being created and deployed now and for the next few years will be described using WSDL and XML Schema
• Want to define the mechanism for how WSMO service descriptions can be grounded to WSDL – Ground WSMO ontologies to XML Schema– Ground WSMO choreography descriptions to WSDL operations
98www.semantic-gov.org
Background – XML
• Standard language for sharing data across systems,especially on the Web
• Application-dependent tag set great flexibility• Many XML based languages for all kinds of purposes• Strong tool support: parsers, editors, storage, querying
• Semantics must be known by receiver in advance; can not be determined from the document itself
99www.semantic-gov.org
Background – XML Schema
• Defines the structure of XML documents– Legal elements and attributes– Order, cardinalities of child elements– Default and fixed values for elements and attributes
• Components of XML Schema– Element declarations (global or local)– Attribute declarations (global or local)– Simple types
• Built-in or defining constraints on values of built-in types
– Complex types• For elements
• Define attributes, child elements
• Extend or restrict definition of an existing complex type
100www.semantic-gov.org
Background – Previous Work
• Comparing XML schema languages (DTD, XS) to Ontologies
XML schema language Ontologies
Define vocabulary and constraints for XML docs
Formal specification of shared domain theory
Structure Meaning, no explicit structure
• Embedding semantic metadata into XML– Complement structure with semantics
• Lifting XML representation to OWL and RDF– We will take a similar approach
• Lowering ontologies to XML schema– More expressive to less expressive
Other Related Areas of Work
101www.semantic-gov.org
Approaches to Mapping
102www.semantic-gov.org
Approach to Mapping #1
• Transformation between XML as defined in WSDL and the XML syntax for a target WSMO ontology– Using XSLT or other XML transformation language
• Advantage– People already know XSLT
• Disadvantage– XML syntax of WSML does not reflect data structure, the XSLT
becomes complex
103www.semantic-gov.org
Approach to Mapping #2
• Map directly between XML and WSML instances– Using a mapping language specific for this task
• Advantage– Specific language most natural (optimized for this)
• Disadvantage– Yet another mapping language
104www.semantic-gov.org
Approach to Mapping #3
• Create WSMO Ontology from Schema in WSDL – Define mappings from conceptual framework for XML Schema to
WSMO Ontology metamodel– Generate ontology– Create set of executable mapping rules for data instances
• Advantages– Uses WSMO data mediation– In simplest case no manually-created mapping required
• Disadvantage– Ontology-level mapping may be complex
105www.semantic-gov.org
Creating the Mappings
106www.semantic-gov.org
Creating the Mappings Explained
• Define a mapping between the XML Schema Conceptual Model to the WSMO Ontology Metamodel
• Automatically create a WSMO ontology from specific XML Schema
• Create the bidirectional mapping rules to be used for the transformation between XML instances and WSMO instances.– Created at the same time as the generation of the
WSMO ontology from an XML Schema– These mapping are completely derived from the actions
described in the first two bullet points
107www.semantic-gov.org
Creating the Mappings (I)
• The generated ontology is sufficient for designer’s needs• Mapping rules to get from instances of WSMO to
instances of XML and vice-versa are created automatically
108www.semantic-gov.org
Creating the Mappings (II)
• Designer wishes to use a specific book ontology• Generated ontology + rules created as before• Additional data mediation needs to be defined
(using existing ontology mapping tools)
109www.semantic-gov.org
Grounding Illustrated
unnecessaryin simple
case
110www.semantic-gov.org
Grounding WSMO Choreography
• Choreography representation in WSMO– States (made up of concepts) and transitions
• Concept modes– Some concepts represent in or out messages– In, out, shared
• Grounding property– Specifies a set of URIs grounding that concept– URIs point to WSDL In, Out or Fault messages
• URIs for identifying messages in WSDL 2.0
http://example.com/#wsdl.interfaceMessageReference(PrinterInterface/print/In)
• WSDL WSMO – manual (with tool support)• WSMO WSDL – auto generation of WSDL
– In case WSDL doesn’t exist yet
111www.semantic-gov.org
WSMO Grounding – Summary
• Links from WSMO to the WSDL and XML Schema world• Needed to describe an existing WSDL service• Three steps in approach
– Define mappings from metamodel of XML Schema to that of WSMO
– Use the mappings to generate WSMO ontologies– Also generate mapping rules that can be applied at runtime to lift
and lower data instances
• Simple scenarios need no data mediation• Choreography grounded to WSDL messages
– Can go to underlying space instead
112www.semantic-gov.org
Mediation
113www.semantic-gov.org
Mediation
• Heterogeneity as inherent characteristic of (Semantic) Web: – Heterogeneous terminology– Heterogeneous languages / formalisms – Heterogeneous communication protocols and business processes
• WSMO identifies Mediators as top level elements, i.e. central aspect of Semantic Web Services – Levels of mediation: data, functional, processes– WSMO Mediators: ooMeditor, ggMediator, wgMediator, wwMediator
• Approach: declarative, generic mismatch resolution – Classification of possible & resolvable mismatches – Mediation definition language & mediation patterns– Execution environment for mappings
114www.semantic-gov.org
Data Level Mediation
• Scope– Solving terminological mismatches
• Related Aspects / Techniques: – Ontology Integration (Mapping, Merging, Alignment) – Data Lifting & Lowering– Transformation between Languages / Formalisms
• Terminology Mismatches Classification – Conceptualization Mismatches
• same domain concepts, but different conceptualization• different levels of abstraction • different ontological structure • => resolution only includs human intervention
– Explication Mismatches • mismatches between:
– T (Term used), D (definition of concepts), C (real world concept)• => automated resolution partially possible
115www.semantic-gov.org
Functional Level Mediation
• Scope– Solving functional mismatches between goals and/or ws
• Related Aspects/Techniques– Discovery– Semantic Matchmaking
• Matchmaking Mismatches
= G/WS = G/WS
X
Exact Match Subsumption Match Intersection Match No MatchPlugIn Match
116www.semantic-gov.org
Process Level Mediation
• Scope– Resolves communication mismatches and establish behavior
compatibility
• Related Aspects/Techniques– Data and control flow composition
• Process Mismatches– Signature terminology mismatches (need for data level mediation)
– Communication/behavior mismatches
Business Partner1Business Partner1
Business Partner2Business A
B B
Business Partner1Business Partner1
Business Partner2Business Partner2
A B
B A
Business Partner1Business Partner1
Business Partner2Business Partner2
A and BA
B
Business Partner1Business Partner1
Business Partner2Business Partner2
A
BA and B
PM
PM
PM
PM
Business Partner1Business Partner1
Business Partner2Business Partner2
A
AckA
APM
117www.semantic-gov.org
WSMO Mediators and Mediation Levels
• ooMediator– Data Level Mediation
• ggMediator– Data Level Mediation– Functional Level Mediation
Ex:
• wgMediator– Data Level Mediation– Functional Level Mediation– Process Level Mediation
• wwMediator– Data Level Mediation– Functional Level Mediation– Process Level Mediation
internal business logic of
Web Service(not of interest in Service
Interface Description)
internal business logic of
Web Service(not of interest in Service
Interface Description)
WW
Med
iator
www.semantic-gov.org
</Semantic Web Services Techniques >
Questions and Answers
www.semantic-gov.org
<WSMX – Principles, Architecture and Implementation>
Adrian Mocan
120www.semantic-gov.org
WSMX Introduction
• Software framework for runtime binding of service requesters and service providers
• WSMX interprets service requester’s goal to– discover matching services– select (if desired) the service that best fits– provide mediation (if required)– make the service invocation
• Is based on the conceptual model provided by WSMO• Has a formal execution semantics• Service Oriented and event-based architecture
– based on microkernel design using technologies as J2EE, Hibernate, Spring, JMX, etc.
121www.semantic-gov.org
WSMX Motivation
• Provide middleware ‘glue’ for Semantic Web Services– Allow service providers focus on their business
• Provide a reference implementation for WSMO– Eat our own cake
• Provide an environment for goal based service discovery and invocation– Run-time binding of service requester and provider
• Provide a flexible Service Oriented Architecture– Add, update, remove components at run-time as needed
• Keep open-source to encourage participation– Developers are free to use in their own code
• Define formal execution semantics– Unambiguous model of system behaviour
122www.semantic-gov.org
WSMX Usage Scenario
123www.semantic-gov.org
WSMX Usage Scenario - P2P
• A P2P network of WSMX ‘nodes’• Each WSMX node described as a SWS• Communication via WSML over SOAP• Distributed discovery – first aim• Longer term aim - distributed execution environment
124www.semantic-gov.org
WSMX Usage Scenario - P2P
Peer
Internet
Message
Message
Internet
Message
MessagePeer
WSMX SWSARCHITECTURE
125www.semantic-gov.org
WSMX Usage Scenario - P2P
Exe
cutio
n M
anag
emen
t
Ver
tical
Ser
vice
s e.
g. S
ecur
ity
Storage Reasoning
Communication (external)
Fault Handling Monitoring
Data MediationProcess
Mediation
Discovery Adaptation Composition Choreography
Application Services Layer
Problem Solving Layer
Base Services Layer
End User Tools Developer Tools
Internet
Message
MessagePeerPeer
Internet
Message
Message
126www.semantic-gov.org
Development Process & Releases
• The development process for WSMX includes:– Establishing its conceptual model– Defining its execution semantics– Develop the architecture– Design the software – Building a working implementation
• Releases:
2005 2006
January 2005 (WSMX 0.1.6)
July 2005 (WSMX 0.2.0) current status of components
March 2006 (WSMX 0.3.0)
November 2004 (WSMX 0.1.5)
127www.semantic-gov.org
Design Principles
• Strong Decoupling & Strong Mediation– autonomous components with mediators for interoperability
• Interface vs. Implementation– distinguish interface (= description) from implementation
(=program)
• Peer to Peer– interaction between equal partners (in terms of control)
WSMO Design Principles == WSMX Design Principles
== SOA Design Principles
128www.semantic-gov.org
Benefits of SOA
• Better reuse– Build new functionality (new execution semantics) on
top of existing Business Services
• Well defined interfaces – Manage changes without affecting the Core System
• Easier Maintainability– Changes/Versions are not all-or-nothing
• Better Flexibility
129www.semantic-gov.org
Service Oriented State
• The interface to the service is implementation-independent
• The service can be dynamically invoked – Runtime binding
• The service is self-contained– Maintains its own state
130www.semantic-gov.org
Messaging
• Messaging is peer-to-peer facility• Distributed communication
– Loosely coupled
• Sender does not need to know receiver (and vice versa)• Asynchronous mechanism to communicate between
software applications
131www.semantic-gov.org
WSMX Architecture
MessagingMessaging
Application Management
Application Management
Service Oriented
Architectures
Service Oriented
Architectures
132www.semantic-gov.org
Selected Components
• Adapters• Parser• Invoker• Choreography • Process Mediator• Discovery• Data Mediator• Resource Manager• Reasoning
Exe
cutio
n M
an
ag
em
en
t
Ve
rtic
al S
erv
ice
s e
.g.
Se
curi
ty
Storage Reasoning
Communication (external)
Fault Handling Monitoring
Data MediationProcess
Mediation
Discovery Adaptation Composition Choreography
Application Services Layer
Problem Solving Layer
Base Services Layer
End User Tools Developer Tools
Internet
Message
MessagePeerPeer
Internet
Message
Message
133www.semantic-gov.org
Adapters
• To overcome data representation mismatches on the communication layer
• Transforms the format of a received message into WSML compliant format
• Based on mapping rules
134www.semantic-gov.org
Parser
• WSML compliant parser– Code handed over to wsmo4j initiative
http://wsmo4j.sourceforge.net/
• Validates WSML description files• Compiles WSML description into internal memory model• Stores WSML description persistently
(using Resource Manager)
135www.semantic-gov.org
Communication Mgr – Invoker
• WSMX uses – The SOAP implementation from Apache AXIS – The Apache Web Service Invocation Framework (WSIF)
• WSMO service descriptions are grounded to WSDL• Both RPC and Document style invocations possible• Input parameters for the Web Services are translated
from WSML to XML using an additional XML Converter component.
Network
InvokerApache
AXISXML
ConverterMediatedWSML Data
XML WebService
SOAP
136www.semantic-gov.org
Choreography
• Requester and provider have their own observable communication patterns– Choreography part of WSMO
• Choreography instances are loaded for the requester and provider– Both requester and provider have their own WSMO descriptions
• Choreography Engine– Evaluation of transition rules
• Prepares the available data
– Sends data to the Process Mediator• The Process Mediator filters, changed or even replaced data
– Receive data from PM and forwards it to the Communication manager• Data to be finally sent to the communication partner
137www.semantic-gov.org
Process Mediator
• Requester and provider have their own communication patterns
• Only if the two match precisely, a direct communication may take place
• At design time equivalences between the choreographies’ conceptual descriptions is determined and stored as set of rules
• The Process Mediator provides the means for runtime analyses of two choreography instances and uses mediators to compensate possible mismatches
138www.semantic-gov.org
Process Mediator – Addressed mismatches
Business Partner1Business Partner1
Business Partner2Business A
B B
Business Partner1Business Partner1
Business Partner2Business Partner2
A B
B A
Business Partner1Business Partner1
Business Partner2Business Partner2
A and BA
B
Business Partner1Business Partner1
Business Partner2Business Partner2
A
BA and B
PM
PM
PM
PM
Business Partner1Business Partner1
Business Partner2Business Partner2
A
AckA
APM
139www.semantic-gov.org
itinerary[origin, destination, date]
time
price
origin
destination
itinerary[origin, destination]
date
itinerary [route,date, time, price]
REQUEST
SERVICE
Processes Mediator
Process Mediation Example
140www.semantic-gov.org
time
pricedate
REQUEST
SERVICE
Processes Mediator
Process Mediation Example
itinerary[origin, destination, date]
origin
destination
itinerary[origin, destination]
itinerary [route,date, time, price]
141www.semantic-gov.org
time
pricedate
REQUEST
SERVICE
Processes Mediator
Process Mediation Example
itinerary[origin, destination, date]
origin
destination
itinerary[origin, destination]
itinerary [route,date, time, price]
142www.semantic-gov.org
time
pricedate
REQUEST
SERVICE
Processes Mediator
itinerary[origin, destination, date]
origin
destination
itinerary[origin, destination]
itinerary [route,date, time, price]
Process Mediation Example
143www.semantic-gov.org
time
pricedate
REQUEST
SERVICE
Processes Mediator
itinerary[origin, destination, date]
origin
destination
itinerary[origin, destination]
itinerary [route,date, time, price]
Process Mediation Example
144www.semantic-gov.org
Discovery
• Responsible for finding appropriate Web Services to achieve a goal (discovery)
• Current discovery component is based on simple matching– Keywords identified in the NFP of the goal– Matched against NFPs of the published WSs – Variable set of NFPs to be considered for this process– To be extended
• Values in NFPs might be concepts from ontologies
• More elaborate string matching algorithms
• Advanced semantic discovery in prototypical stage
145www.semantic-gov.org
Discovery
Resource Repository (UDDI or other)
Keyword-/ Classification-based Filtering
Controlled Vocabulary Filtering
Semantic Matchmaking
usable Web Service
efficient narrowing of search space (relevant services to be inspected)
retrieve ServiceDescriptions
invoke Web Service
146www.semantic-gov.org
Data Mediator
• Ontology-to-ontology mediation• A set of mapping rules are defined and then executed• Initially rules are defined semi-automatic• Create for each source instance the target instance(s)
Target Ontology
Source Ontology
Storage
Mappings
Mappings
Source Instance
Target Instance
Run-time ComponentDesign-time Component
Data Mediation
147www.semantic-gov.org
Run-Time Data Mediator
• Main Mediation Scenario: Instance Transformation
• Inputs– Incoming data
• Source ontology instances
• Features– Completely automatic process– Grounding of the abstract mappings to a concrete language
• WSML
– Uses a reasoner to evaluate the mapping rules• MINS
• Outputs– Mediated data
• Target ontology instances
Data Mediation
148www.semantic-gov.org
Ontology Mapping Language
• Language Neutral Mapping Language – mapping definitions on meta-layer (i.e. on generic ontological constructs) – independent of ontology specification language – “Grounding” to specific languages for execution (WSML, OWL, F-Logic)
• Main Features: – Mapping Document (sources, mappings, mediation service) – direction of mapping (uni- / bidirectional) – conditions / logical expressions for data type mismatch handling, restriction of
mapping validity, and complex mapping definitions – mapping constructs:
• classMapping, attributeMapping, relationMapping (between similar constructs) • classAtrributeMapping, classRelationMapping, classInstanceMapping• instanceMapping (explicit ontology instance transformation)
– mapping operators: • =, <, <=, >, >=, and, or, not • inverse, symmetric, transitive, reflexive • join, split
149www.semantic-gov.org
Ontology O2
Mapping Language Example
Human - name
Adult Child
Person- name - age
tomas memberOf Person- name = Tomas Vitvar- age = 28
classMapping(unidirectional o2:Person o1.Adult attributeValueCondition(o2.Person.age >= 18))
This allows to transform the instance ‘tomas’ of concept person in ontology O2 into a valid instance of concept ‘adult’ in ontology O1
Ontology O1
150www.semantic-gov.org
Resource Manager
• Stores internal memory model to a data store• Decouples storage mechanism from the rest of WSMX• Data model is compliant to WSMO API• Independent of any specific data store implementation
i.e. database and storage mechanism
151www.semantic-gov.org
Reasoner
• Mins – Datalog + Negation + Function
Symbols Reasoner Engine– Features
• Built-in predicates • Function symbols • Stratified negation
• WSMO4J– validation, serialization and parsing
• WSML2Reasoner– Reasoning API
• mapping fromWSML to a vendor-neutral rule representation
– Contains: • Common API for WSML Reasoners• Transformations of WSML to tool-specific input data
(query answering or instance retrieval)
• WSML-DL-Reasoner– Features:
• T-Box reasoning (provided by FaCT++) • Querying for all concepts • Querying for the equivalents, for the children, for the
descendants, for the parents and for all ancestors of a given concept
• Testing the satisfiability of a given concept with respect to the knowledge base
• Subsumption test of two concepts with respect to the knowledge base
• Wrapper of WSML-DL to the XML syntax of DL used in the DIG interface
152www.semantic-gov.org
System Entry Points
• achieveGoal (Document): Context
• getWebServices (Document): Context
invokeWebService(Document, Context): Context
153www.semantic-gov.org
Define “Business” Process
Discover Web Services
Create Choreography
Created
Discover Services
Mediate Data
Mediate Data
Return Mediated Data
Return Mediated Data
Return Web Services
Check Choreography
Confirmed
Call Invoker
Confirmed
Start
End
154www.semantic-gov.org
Generate Wrappers for Components
Discover Web Services
Create Choreography
Created
Discover Services
Mediate Data
Mediate Data
Return Mediated Data
Return Mediated Data
Return Web Services
Check Choreography
Confirmed
Call Invoker
Confirmed
Start
End
Discovery Wrapper
Data Mediator Wrapper
ChoreographyWrapper
Communication Manager Wrapper
Registry of known components
155www.semantic-gov.org
Context Data
PROCESS CONTEXT
Discover Web Services
Create Choreography
Created
Discover Services
Mediate Data
Mediate Data
Return Mediated Data
Return Mediated Data
Return Web Services
Check Choreography
Confirmed
Call Invoker
Confirmed
Start
End
Discovery Wrapper
Data Mediator Wrapper
ChoreographyWrapper
Communication Manager Wrapper
Registry of known components
Choreography objectMediated objects,
Web Services entities
ErrorsExceptions
156www.semantic-gov.org
Event-based Implementation
MediatorDiscoveryChoreographyCommunication
Manager
Core – Manager
“Business” Process – Internal Workflow
Choreography Wrapper
Discovery Wrapper
implements Mediator Interface
Event and Notification Distribution/Delivery Mechanism
Data Mediator Wrapper
Communication Manager Wrapper
events events eventsnotifications notifications notificationsnotificationsevents
157www.semantic-gov.org
Execution Semantics
WSMX
Syste
m In
terface
WSMX ManagerWSMX Manager Core
Administration Framework Interface
Data and C
omm
unication Protocols A
dapters
Adapter 1
Adapter 2
Adapter n
... Grounding
CM Wrapper
CommunicationManager
Interface
Invoker Receiver
RMWrapper
Resource Manager
Interface
ParserWrapper
Parser
Interface
DiscoveryWrapper
Discovery
Interface
SelectorWrapper
Selector
Interface
DMWrapper
DataMediator
Interface
PMWrapper
ProcessMediator
Interface
ChoreographyWrapper
Choreography
Interface
Reasoner Interface
Reasoner
Resource Manager Interface
WSMO Objects Non WSMO Objects
WSMT – Web Services Modelling Toolkit
Service Providers
Web Service 1
Web Service 2
Web Service p
...
Service Requesters
Back-End Application
Agent acting on behalf of service
requester
WSML EditorWSMX Monitor Choreography EditorWSMX Managment Mediator Editor
ComponentWrapper
New Component
Interface
Request to discoverWeb services.
158www.semantic-gov.org
Execution Semantics
WSMX
System
Interface
WSMX ManagerWSMX Manager Core
Administration Framework Interface
Data and C
omm
unication Protocols A
dapters
Adapter 1
Adapter 2
Adapter n
... Grounding
CM Wrapper
CommunicationManager
Interface
Invoker Receiver
RMWrapper
Resource Manager
Interface
ParserWrapper
Parser
Interface
DiscoveryWrapper
Discovery
Interface
SelectorWrapper
Selector
Interface
DMWrapper
DataMediator
Interface
PMWrapper
ProcessMediator
Interface
ChoreographyWrapper
Choreography
Interface
Reasoner Interface
Reasoner
Resource Manager Interface
WSMO Objects Non WSMO Objects
WSMT – Web Services Modelling Toolkit
Service Providers
Web Service 1
Web Service 2
Web Service p
...
Service Requesters
Back-End Application
Agent acting on behalf of service
requester
WSML EditorWSMX Monitor Choreography EditorWSMX Managment Mediator Editor
ComponentWrapper
New Component
Interface
Goal expressedin WSML is sent toWSMX SystemInterface
159www.semantic-gov.org
Execution Semantics
WSMX
System
Interface
WSMX ManagerWSMX Manager Core
Administration Framework Interface
Data and C
omm
unication Protocols A
dapters
Adapter 1
Adapter 2
Adapter n
... Grounding
CM Wrapper
CommunicationManager
Interface
Invoker Receiver
RMWrapper
Resource Manager
Interface
ParserWrapper
Parser
Interface
DiscoveryWrapper
Discovery
Interface
SelectorWrapper
Selector
Interface
DMWrapper
DataMediator
Interface
PMWrapper
ProcessMediator
Interface
ChoreographyWrapper
Choreography
Interface
Reasoner Interface
Reasoner
Resource Manager Interface
WSMO Objects Non WSMO Objects
WSMT – Web Services Modelling Toolkit
Service Providers
Web Service 1
Web Service 2
Web Service p
...
Service Requesters
Back-End Application
Agent acting on behalf of service
requester
WSML EditorWSMX Monitor Choreography EditorWSMX Managment Mediator Editor
ComponentWrapper
New Component
Interface
Com. M. implementsthe interface toreceive WSML goals
160www.semantic-gov.org
Execution Semantics
WSMX
System
Interface
WSMX ManagerWSMX Manager Core
Administration Framework Interface
Data and C
omm
unication Protocols A
dapters
Adapter 1
Adapter 2
Adapter n
... Grounding
CM Wrapper
CommunicationManager
Interface
Invoker Receiver
RMWrapper
Resource Manager
Interface
ParserWrapper
Parser
Interface
DiscoveryWrapper
Discovery
Interface
SelectorWrapper
Selector
Interface
DMWrapper
DataMediator
Interface
PMWrapper
ProcessMediator
Interface
ChoreographyWrapper
Choreography
Interface
Reasoner Interface
Reasoner
Resource Manager Interface
WSMO Objects Non WSMO Objects
WSMT – Web Services Modelling Toolkit
Service Providers
Web Service 1
Web Service 2
Web Service p
...
Service Requesters
Back-End Application
Agent acting on behalf of service
requester
WSML EditorWSMX Monitor Choreography EditorWSMX Managment Mediator Editor
ComponentWrapper
New Component
Interface
Com. M. informsCore that Goalhas been received
161www.semantic-gov.org
Execution Semantics
WSMX
System
Interface
WSMX ManagerWSMX Manager Core
Administration Framework Interface
Data and C
omm
unication Protocols A
dapters
Adapter 1
Adapter 2
Adapter n
... Grounding
CM Wrapper
CommunicationManager
Interface
Invoker Receiver
RMWrapper
Resource Manager
Interface
ParserWrapper
Parser
Interface
DiscoveryWrapper
Discovery
Interface
SelectorWrapper
Selector
Interface
DMWrapper
DataMediator
Interface
PMWrapper
ProcessMediator
Interface
ChoreographyWrapper
Choreography
Interface
Reasoner Interface
Reasoner
Resource Manager Interface
WSMO Objects Non WSMO Objects
WSMT – Web Services Modelling Toolkit
Service Providers
Web Service 1
Web Service 2
Web Service p
...
Service Requesters
Back-End Application
Agent acting on behalf of service
requester
WSML EditorWSMX Monitor Choreography EditorWSMX Managment Mediator Editor
ComponentWrapper
New Component
Interface
Chor. wrapperpicks up event for Chor. component
162www.semantic-gov.org
Execution Semantics
WSMX
System
Interface
WSMX ManagerWSMX Manager Core
Administration Framework Interface
Data and C
omm
unication Protocols A
dapters
Adapter 1
Adapter 2
Adapter n
... Grounding
CM Wrapper
CommunicationManager
Interface
Invoker Receiver
RMWrapper
Resource Manager
Interface
ParserWrapper
Parser
Interface
DiscoveryWrapper
Discovery
Interface
SelectorWrapper
Selector
Interface
DMWrapper
DataMediator
Interface
PMWrapper
ProcessMediator
Interface
ChoreographyWrapper
Choreography
Interface
Reasoner Interface
Reasoner
Resource Manager Interface
WSMO Objects Non WSMO Objects
WSMT – Web Services Modelling Toolkit
Service Providers
Web Service 1
Web Service 2
Web Service p
...
Service Requesters
Back-End Application
Agent acting on behalf of service
requester
WSML EditorWSMX Monitor Choreography EditorWSMX Managment Mediator Editor
ComponentWrapper
New Component
Interface
New choreography Instance is created
163www.semantic-gov.org
Execution Semantics
WSMX
System
Interface
WSMX ManagerWSMX Manager Core
Administration Framework Interface
Data and C
omm
unication Protocols A
dapters
Adapter 1
Adapter 2
Adapter n
... Grounding
CM Wrapper
CommunicationManager
Interface
Invoker Receiver
RMWrapper
Resource Manager
Interface
ParserWrapper
Parser
Interface
DiscoveryWrapper
Discovery
Interface
SelectorWrapper
Selector
Interface
DMWrapper
DataMediator
Interface
PMWrapper
ProcessMediator
Interface
ChoreographyWrapper
Choreography
Interface
Reasoner Interface
Reasoner
Resource Manager Interface
WSMO Objects Non WSMO Objects
WSMT – Web Services Modelling Toolkit
Service Providers
Web Service 1
Web Service 2
Web Service p
...
Service Requesters
Back-End Application
Agent acting on behalf of service
requester
WSML EditorWSMX Monitor Choreography EditorWSMX Managment Mediator Editor
ComponentWrapper
New Component
Interface
Core is notifiedthat choreographyinstance has beencreated.
164www.semantic-gov.org
Execution Semantics
WSMX
System
Interface
WSMX ManagerWSMX Manager Core
Administration Framework Interface
Data and C
omm
unication Protocols A
dapters
Adapter 1
Adapter 2
Adapter n
... Grounding
CM Wrapper
CommunicationManager
Interface
Invoker Receiver
RMWrapper
Resource Manager
Interface
ParserWrapper
Parser
Interface
DiscoveryWrapper
Discovery
Interface
SelectorWrapper
Selector
Interface
DMWrapper
DataMediator
Interface
PMWrapper
ProcessMediator
Interface
ChoreographyWrapper
Choreography
Interface
Reasoner Interface
Reasoner
Resource Manager Interface
WSMO Objects Non WSMO Objects
WSMT – Web Services Modelling Toolkit
Service Providers
Web Service 1
Web Service 2
Web Service p
...
Service Requesters
Back-End Application
Agent acting on behalf of service
requester
WSML EditorWSMX Monitor Choreography EditorWSMX Managment Mediator Editor
ComponentWrapper
New Component
Interface
WSML goal isparsed to internal format.
165www.semantic-gov.org
Execution Semantics
WSMX
System
Interface
WSMX ManagerWSMX Manager Core
Administration Framework Interface
Data and C
omm
unication Protocols A
dapters
Adapter 1
Adapter 2
Adapter n
... Grounding
CM Wrapper
CommunicationManager
Interface
Invoker Receiver
RMWrapper
Resource Manager
Interface
ParserWrapper
Parser
Interface
DiscoveryWrapper
Discovery
Interface
SelectorWrapper
Selector
Interface
DMWrapper
DataMediator
Interface
PMWrapper
ProcessMediator
Interface
ChoreographyWrapper
Choreography
Interface
Reasoner Interface
Reasoner
Resource Manager Interface
WSMO Objects Non WSMO Objects
WSMT – Web Services Modelling Toolkit
Service Providers
Web Service 1
Web Service 2
Web Service p
...
Service Requesters
Back-End Application
Agent acting on behalf of service
requester
WSML EditorWSMX Monitor Choreography EditorWSMX Managment Mediator Editor
ComponentWrapper
New Component
Interface
Discovery isinvoked
for parsed goal.
166www.semantic-gov.org
Execution Semantics
WSMX
System
Interface
WSMX ManagerWSMX Manager Core
Administration Framework Interface
Data and C
omm
unication Protocols A
dapters
Adapter 1
Adapter 2
Adapter n
... Grounding
CM Wrapper
CommunicationManager
Interface
Invoker Receiver
RMWrapper
Resource Manager
Interface
ParserWrapper
Parser
Interface
DiscoveryWrapper
Discovery
Interface
SelectorWrapper
Selector
Interface
DMWrapper
DataMediator
Interface
PMWrapper
ProcessMediator
Interface
ChoreographyWrapper
Choreography
Interface
Reasoner Interface
Reasoner
Resource Manager Interface
WSMO Objects Non WSMO Objects
WSMT – Web Services Modelling Toolkit
Service Providers
Web Service 1
Web Service 2
Web Service p
...
Service Requesters
Back-End Application
Agent acting on behalf of service
requester
WSML EditorWSMX Monitor Choreography EditorWSMX Managment Mediator Editor
ComponentWrapper
New Component
Interface
Discovery may require ontology
mediation.
167www.semantic-gov.org
Execution Semantics
WSMX
System
Interface
WSMX ManagerWSMX Manager Core
Administration Framework Interface
Data and C
omm
unication Protocols A
dapters
Adapter 1
Adapter 2
Adapter n
... Grounding
CM Wrapper
CommunicationManager
Interface
Invoker Receiver
RMWrapper
Resource Manager
Interface
ParserWrapper
Parser
Interface
DiscoveryWrapper
Discovery
Interface
SelectorWrapper
Selector
Interface
DMWrapper
DataMediator
Interface
PMWrapper
ProcessMediator
Interface
ChoreographyWrapper
Choreography
Interface
Reasoner Interface
Reasoner
Resource Manager Interface
WSMO Objects Non WSMO Objects
WSMT – Web Services Modelling Toolkit
Service Providers
Web Service 1
Web Service 2
Web Service p
...
Service Requesters
Back-End Application
Agent acting on behalf of service
requester
WSML EditorWSMX Monitor Choreography EditorWSMX Managment Mediator Editor
ComponentWrapper
New Component
Interface
After data mediation,Discovery iterates,if needed throughlast steps untilresult set is finished.
168www.semantic-gov.org
Execution Semantics
WSMX
System
Interface
WSMX ManagerWSMX Manager Core
Administration Framework Interface
Data and C
omm
unication Protocols A
dapters
Adapter 1
Adapter 2
Adapter n
... Grounding
CM Wrapper
CommunicationManager
Interface
Invoker Receiver
RMWrapper
Resource Manager
Interface
ParserWrapper
Parser
Interface
DiscoveryWrapper
Discovery
Interface
SelectorWrapper
Selector
Interface
DMWrapper
DataMediator
Interface
PMWrapper
ProcessMediator
Interface
ChoreographyWrapper
Choreography
Interface
Reasoner Interface
Reasoner
Resource Manager Interface
WSMO Objects Non WSMO Objects
WSMT – Web Services Modelling Toolkit
Service Providers
Web Service 1
Web Service 2
Web Service p
...
Service Requesters
Back-End Application
Agent acting on behalf of service
requester
WSML EditorWSMX Monitor Choreography EditorWSMX Managment Mediator Editor
ComponentWrapper
New Component
Interface
Selection is invokedto relax result set tofinally one service.
169www.semantic-gov.org
Execution Semantics
WSMX
System
Interface
WSMX ManagerWSMX Manager Core
Administration Framework Interface
Data and C
omm
unication Protocols A
dapters
Adapter 1
Adapter 2
Adapter n
... Grounding
CM Wrapper
CommunicationManager
Interface
Invoker Receiver
RMWrapper
Resource Manager
Interface
ParserWrapper
Parser
Interface
DiscoveryWrapper
Discovery
Interface
SelectorWrapper
Selector
Interface
DMWrapper
DataMediator
Interface
PMWrapper
ProcessMediator
Interface
ChoreographyWrapper
Choreography
Interface
Reasoner Interface
Reasoner
Resource Manager Interface
WSMO Objects Non WSMO Objects
WSMT – Web Services Modelling Toolkit
Service Providers
Web Service 1
Web Service 2
Web Service p
...
Service Requesters
Back-End Application
Agent acting on behalf of service
requester
WSML EditorWSMX Monitor Choreography EditorWSMX Managment Mediator Editor
ComponentWrapper
New Component
Interface
Choreographyinstance for goalrequester is checkedfor next steps.
170www.semantic-gov.org
Execution Semantics
WSMX
System
Interface
WSMX ManagerWSMX Manager Core
Administration Framework Interface
Data and C
omm
unication Protocols A
dapters
Adapter 1
Adapter 2
Adapter n
... Grounding
CM Wrapper
CommunicationManager
Interface
Invoker Receiver
RMWrapper
Resource Manager
Interface
ParserWrapper
Parser
Interface
DiscoveryWrapper
Discovery
Interface
SelectorWrapper
Selector
Interface
DMWrapper
DataMediator
Interface
PMWrapper
ProcessMediator
Interface
ChoreographyWrapper
Choreography
Interface
Reasoner Interface
Reasoner
Resource Manager Interface
WSMO Objects Non WSMO Objects
WSMT – Web Services Modelling Toolkit
Service Providers
Web Service 1
Web Service 2
Web Service p
...
Service Requesters
Back-End Application
Agent acting on behalf of service
requester
WSML EditorWSMX Monitor Choreography EditorWSMX Managment Mediator Editor
ComponentWrapper
New Component
Interface
Result is returnedto Com. Man. to beforwarded to theservice requester.
171www.semantic-gov.org
Execution Semantics
WSMX
System
Interface
WSMX ManagerWSMX Manager Core
Administration Framework Interface
Data and C
omm
unication Protocols A
dapters
Adapter 1
Adapter 2
Adapter n
... Grounding
CM Wrapper
CommunicationManager
Interface
Invoker Receiver
RMWrapper
Resource Manager
Interface
ParserWrapper
Parser
Interface
DiscoveryWrapper
Discovery
Interface
SelectorWrapper
Selector
Interface
DMWrapper
DataMediator
Interface
PMWrapper
ProcessMediator
Interface
ChoreographyWrapper
Choreography
Interface
Reasoner Interface
Reasoner
Resource Manager Interface
WSMO Objects Non WSMO Objects
WSMT – Web Services Modelling Toolkit
Service Providers
Web Service 1
Web Service 2
Web Service p
...
Service Requesters
Back-End Application
Agent acting on behalf of service
requester
WSML EditorWSMX Monitor Choreography EditorWSMX Managment Mediator Editor
ComponentWrapper
New Component
Interface
Set of Web Servicedescriptionsexpressed in WSMLsent to adapter.
172www.semantic-gov.org
Execution Semantics
WSMX
System
Interface
WSMX ManagerWSMX Manager Core
Administration Framework Interface
Data and C
omm
unication Protocols A
dapters
Adapter 1
Adapter 2
Adapter n
... Grounding
CM Wrapper
CommunicationManager
Interface
Invoker Receiver
RMWrapper
Resource Manager
Interface
ParserWrapper
Parser
Interface
DiscoveryWrapper
Discovery
Interface
SelectorWrapper
Selector
Interface
DMWrapper
DataMediator
Interface
PMWrapper
ProcessMediator
Interface
ChoreographyWrapper
Choreography
Interface
Reasoner Interface
Reasoner
Resource Manager Interface
WSMO Objects Non WSMO Objects
WSMT – Web Services Modelling Toolkit
Service Providers
Web Service 1
Web Service 2
Web Service p
...
Service Requesters
Back-End Application
Agent acting on behalf of service
requester
WSML EditorWSMX Monitor Choreography EditorWSMX Managment Mediator Editor
ComponentWrapper
New Component
Interface
Set of Web Servicedescriptions expressedin requester’s ownformat returned togoal requester.
173www.semantic-gov.org
WSMX Usage Scenario - P2P
• Complete the functionality for all the boxesE
xecu
tion
Man
agem
ent
Ver
tical
Ser
vice
s e.
g. S
ecur
ity
Storage Reasoning
Communication (external)
Fault Handling Monitoring
Data MediationProcess
Mediation
Discovery Adaptation Composition Choreography
Application Services Layer
Problem Solving Layer
Base Services Layer
End User Tools Developer Tools
Internet
Message
MessagePeerPeer
Internet
Message
Message
174www.semantic-gov.org
WSMX Conclusions
• Conceptual model is WSMO • End to end functionality for executing SWS• Has a formal execution semantics• Real implementation • Open source code base at SourceForge• Event-driven component architecture• Growing functionality - developers welcome
175www.semantic-gov.org
WSMX @ Sourceforge.net
www.semantic-gov.org
</WSMX – Principles, Architecture and Implementation>
Questions and Answers
www.semantic-gov.org
<WSMO/L/X Tools>
Adrian Mocan, Marin Dimitrov
178www.semantic-gov.org
Web Service Modeling Toolkit (WSMT)
Adrian Mocan
179www.semantic-gov.org
Web Services Modeling Toolkit
• The aim of the Web Services Modeling Toolkit (WSMT) is to provide high-quality tools for designing, mediating and using Semantic Web Services, through the WSMO paradigm.
• The focus is currently on the following areas:– Creation of ontologies, web services, goals and mediators in
WSMO– Creation of mappings between pairs of ontologies to allow
runtime instance transformation– Management of Execution Environments for Semantic Web
Services like WSMX and IRSIII
180www.semantic-gov.org
Engineering Semantic Descriptions
in WSML
181www.semantic-gov.org
WSML Perspective
• Perspectives in the Eclipse framework allow for a number of Editors and views to be grouped and positions.
• The WSML perspective offers editors and views related to engineering of semantic descriptions in WSMO through the WSML language.
• Other General features include:– WSML file validation– Problems view (errors and warnings on files in the workspace)– Label highlighting (marking of errors and warnings in navigator
view)
182www.semantic-gov.org
WSML Editors and Views in the WSML perspective
EditorsWSML Text Editor
WSML Conceptual Editor
WSML Visualizer
ViewsNavigator view
Problems view
WSML Reasoner
183www.semantic-gov.org
Editors and Views in the WSML perspective
EditorsWSML Text Editor
WSML Conceptual Editor
WSML Visualizer
ViewsNavigator view
Problems view
WSML Reasoner
184www.semantic-gov.org
Editors and Views in the WSML perspective
EditorsWSML Text Editor
WSML Conceptual Editor
WSML Visualizer
ViewsNavigator view
Problems view
WSML Reasoner
185www.semantic-gov.org
Editors and Views in the WSML perspective
EditorsWSML Text Editor
WSML Conceptual Editor
WSML Visualizer
ViewsNavigator view
Problems view
WSML Reasoner
186www.semantic-gov.org
Editors and Views in the WSML perspective
EditorsWSML Text Editor
WSML Conceptual Editor
WSML Visualizer
ViewsNavigator view
Problems view
WSML Reasoner
187www.semantic-gov.org
Editors and Views in the WSML perspective
EditorsWSML Text Editor
WSML Conceptual Editor
WSML Visualizer
ViewsNavigator view
Problems view
WSML Reasoner
188www.semantic-gov.org
Editors and Views in the WSML perspective
EditorsWSML Text Editor
WSML Conceptual Editor
WSML Visualizer
ViewsNavigator view
Problems view
WSML Reasoner
189www.semantic-gov.org
Ontology to Ontology Mapping
190www.semantic-gov.org
Ontology to Ontology Mapping
• As it will never be the case that one universal ontology will ever exist, and it is unlikely that one single ontology will exist for each domain, there is a need for mediating between different descriptions of the same domain.
• Within the WSMT we use the Abstract Mapping Language created by the Ontology Management Working Group to describe the relationships between two WSML ontologies.
• These mappings can be used by an execution environment at runtime to mediate between these two ontologies.
191www.semantic-gov.org
Editors, Views for the Abstract Mapping Language
EditorsAML Text Editor
AML Conceptual Editor
AML View Based Editor
ViewsConcept 2 Concept View
Attribute 2 Attribute View
Concept 2 Attribute View
Attribute 2 Concept View
Status View
192www.semantic-gov.org
Editors, Views for the Abstract Mapping Language
EditorsAML Text Editor
AML Conceptual Editor
AML View Based Editor
ViewsConcept 2 Concept View
Attribute 2 Attribute View
Concept 2 Attribute View
Attribute 2 Concept View
Status View
193www.semantic-gov.org
Editors, Views for the Abstract Mapping Language
EditorsAML Text Editor
AML Conceptual Editor
AML View Based Editor
ViewsConcept 2 Concept View
Attribute 2 Attribute View
Concept 2 Attribute View
Attribute 2 Concept View
Status View
194www.semantic-gov.org
Editors, Views for the Abstract Mapping Language
EditorsAML Text Editor
AML Conceptual Editor
AML View Based Editor
ViewsConcept 2 Concept View
Attribute 2 Attribute View
Concept 2 Attribute View
Attribute 2 Concept View
Status View
195www.semantic-gov.org
Editors, Views for the Abstract Mapping Language
EditorsAML Text Editor
AML Conceptual Editor
AML View Based Editor
ViewsConcept 2 Concept View
Attribute 2 Attribute View
Concept 2 Attribute View
Attribute 2 Concept View
Status View
196www.semantic-gov.org
Editors, Views for the Abstract Mapping Language
EditorsAML Text Editor
AML Conceptual Editor
AML View Based Editor
ViewsConcept 2 Concept View
Attribute 2 Attribute View
Concept 2 Attribute View
Attribute 2 Concept View
Status View
197www.semantic-gov.org
Editors, Views for the Abstract Mapping Language
EditorsAML Text Editor
AML Conceptual Editor
AML View Based Editor
ViewsConcept 2 Concept View
Attribute 2 Attribute View
Concept 2 Attribute View
Attribute 2 Concept View
Status View
198www.semantic-gov.org
Editors, Views for the Abstract Mapping Language
EditorsAML Text Editor
AML Conceptual Editor
AML View Based Editor
ViewsConcept 2 Concept View
Attribute 2 Attribute View
Concept 2 Attribute View
Attribute 2 Concept View
Status View
199www.semantic-gov.org
Web Services and Execution Environments
200www.semantic-gov.org
WSDL Invocation Tool
201www.semantic-gov.org
WSMX Management Tool
202www.semantic-gov.org
WSMO Studio
Marin Dimitrov
www.semantic-gov.org
</WSMO/L/X Tools>
Questions and Answers
www.semantic-gov.org
<Demos>
205www.semantic-gov.org
WSMT
206www.semantic-gov.org
WSMX Demo - Scenario
Client
Stock Transaction Service
Stock InformationService
WSMX
ChoreographyEngine
ChoreographyEngine
OrchestrationEngine
ChoreographyEngine
www.semantic-gov.org
</Demos>
www.semantic-gov.org
References
209www.semantic-gov.org
References
• The central location where WSMO work and papers can be found is WSMO Working Group: http://www.wsmo.org
• WSMO languages – WSML Working Group: http://www.wsml.org
• WSMO implementation – WSMX working group : http://www.wsmx.org– WSMX open source can be found at: https://sourceforge.net/projects/wsmx/
210www.semantic-gov.org
References
• [WSMO Specification]: Roman, D.; Lausen, H.; Keller, U. (eds.): Web Service Modeling Ontology, WSMO Working Draft D2, final version 1.2, 13 April 2005.
• [WSMO Primer]: Feier, C. (ed.): WSMO Primer, WSMO Working Draft D3.1, 18 February 2005.
• [WSMO Choreography and Orchestration] Roman, D.; Scicluna, J., Feier, C. (eds.): Ontology-based Choreography and Orchestration of WSMO Services, WSMO Working Draft D14, 01 March 2005.
• [WSMO Use Case] Stollberg, M.; Lausen, H.; Polleres, A.; Lara, R. (ed.): WSMO Use Case Modeling and Testing, WSMO Working Drafts D3.2; D3.3.; D3.4; D3.5, 05 November 2004.
• [WSML] de Bruijn, J. (Ed.): The WSML Specification, WSML Working Draft D16, 03 February 2005.
• [Arroyo et al. 2004] Arroyo, S., Lara, R., Gomez, J. M., Berka, D., Ding, Y. and Fensel, D: "Semantic Aspects of Web Services" in Practical Handbook of Internet Computing. Munindar P. Singh, editor. Chapman Hall and CRC Press, Baton Rouge. 2004.
• [Berners-Lee et al. 2001] Tim Berners-Lee, James Hendler, and Ora Lassila, “The Semantic Web”. Scientific American, 284(5):34-43, 2001.
211www.semantic-gov.org
References
• [Bussler, 2003] Bussler, C. (2003): B2B Integration. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.
• [Cimpian and Mocan, 2005] Emilia Cimpian, Adrian Mocan: WSMX Process Mediation Based on Choreographies , 1st International Workshop on Web Service Choreography and Orchestration for Business Process Management (BPM 2005), September 2005, Nancy, France
• [Chen et al., 1993] Chen, W., Kifer, M., and Warren, D. S. (1993). HILOG: A foundation for higher-order logic programming. Journal of Logic Programming, 15(3):187-230.
• [Haller et al., 2005] A. Haller, E. Cimpian, A. Mocan, E. Oren, and C. Bussler. WSMX - A Semantic Service-Oriented Architecture. International Conference on Web Services (ICWS 2005), July 2005.
• [Kerrigan, 2006] Mick Kerrigan: Web Service Selection Mechanisms in the Web Service Execution Environment (WSMX), Proceedings of the 21st Annual ACM Symposium on Applied Computing (SAC), April, 2006, Dijon, France
• [Mandell and McIIraith, 2003] Daniel J. Mandell and Sheila A. McIlraith. Adapting BPEL4WS for the Semantic Web: The Bottom-Up Approach to Web Service Interoperation. In Proceedings of the Second International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC2003)
• [Mocan and Cimpian, 2005] Adrian Mocan, Emilia Cimpian: Mapping Creation Using a View Based Approach, 1st International Workshop on Mediation in Semantic Web Services (Mediate 2005), December 2005, Amsterdam, Netherlands
212www.semantic-gov.org
References
• [Domingue et al., 2004] Domingue, J. Cabral, L., Hakimpour, F., Sell D., and Motta, E., (2004) IRS-III: A Platform and Infrastructure for Creating WSMO-based Semantic Web Services WSMO Implementation Workshop (WIW), Frankfurt, Germany, September,2004
• [Feier et al., 2005] C. Feier, A. Polleres, R. Dumitru, J. Domingue, M. Stollberg, and D. Fensel. Towards intelligent web services: The web service modeling ontology (WSMO). International Conference on Intelligent Computing (ICIC), April 2005.
• [Fensel, 2001] Dieter Fensel, “Ontologies: Silver Bullet for Knowledge Management and Electronic Commerce”, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2001.
• [Fensel and Bussler, 2002] Fensel D. and Bussler C., "The Web Service Modeling Framework, WSMF," Electronic Commerce Research and Application, vol. 1, 2002
• [Fensel, 2004] D. Fensel: Triple Space computing - Semantic Web Services based on persistent publication of information. In Proceedings of IFIP International Conference on Intelligence in Communication Systems, Pages 43-53, Bangkok, Thailand, November 2004.
• [Gruber, 1993] Thomas R. Gruber, “A Translation Approach to Portable Ontology Specifications”, Knowledge Acquisition, 5:199-220, 1993.
• [Grosof et al., 2003] Grosof, B. N., Horrocks, I., Volz, R., and Decker, S. (2003). Description logic programs: Combining logic programs with description logic. In Proc. Intl. Conf. on the World Wide Web (WWW-2003), Budapest, Hungary.
213www.semantic-gov.org
References
• [Haselwanter et al., 2005] Haselwanter, T.; Zaremba, Ma.., Zaremba Mi.: Enabling Components Management and Executions Semantics in WSMX. In Proceedings of the 2nd International WSMO Implementation Workshop (WIW 2005), Innsbruck, Austria, June 2005.
• [Keller et al., 2004] Keller, U.; Lara, R.; Polleres, A. (Eds): WSMO Web Service Discovery. WSML Working Draft D5.1, 12 Nov 2004.
• [Keller et al., 2005] Keller, U.; Lara, R.; Lausen, H.; Polleres, A.; Fensel, D.: Automatic Location of Services. In Proc. of the 2nd European Semantic Web Symposium (ESWS2005), Heraklion, Crete, 2005.
• [Kifer et al., 1995] Kifer, M., Lausen, G., and Wu, J. (1995). Logical foundations of object-oriented and frame-based languages. JACM, 42(4):741-843.
• [Kiffer et al., 2004] M. Kifer, R. Lara, A. Polleres, C. Zhao, U. Keller, H. Lausen and D. Fensel: A Logical Framework for Web Service Discovery. Proc. 1st. Intl. Workshop SWS'2004 at ISWC 2004,Hiroshima, Japan, November 8, 2004, CEUR Workshop Proceedings, ISSN 1613-0073
• [Li and Horrocks, 2003] Lei Li and Ian Horrocks. A software framework for matchmaking based on semantic web technology. In Proc. of the Twelfth International World Wide Web Conference (WWW 2003), 2003
• [Paolucci et al., 2002a] Massimo Paolucci, Takahiro Kawamura, Terry R. Payne, Katia Sycara; Importing the Semantic Web in UDDI. In Proceedings of Web Services, E-business and Semantic Web Workshop, 2002
• [Paolucci et al., 2002b] Massimo Paolucci, Takahiro Kawamura, Terry R. Payne, Katia Sycara; "Semantic Matching of Web Services Capabilities." In Proceedings of the 1st International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC2002), 2002
214www.semantic-gov.org
References
• [Pan and Horrocks, 2004] Pan, J. Z. and Horrocks, I. (2004). OWL-E: Extending OWL with expressive datatype expressions. IMG Technical Report IMG/2004/KR-SW-01/v1.0, Victoria University of Manchester. Available from http://dl-web.man.ac.uk/Doc/IMGTR-OWL-E.pdf.
• [Preist, 2004] Preist, C.: A Conceptual Architecture for Semantic Web Services. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC 2004), 2004, pp. 395 - 409.
• [Pollers et al., 2005] Axel Polleres, Holger Lausen, Jos de Bruijn and Dieter Fensel. WSML - A Language Framework for Semantic Web Services. W3C Workshop on Rule Languages for Interoperability, April 2005.
• [Stencil Group] - www.stencilgroup.com/ideas_scope_200106wsdefined.html
• [Stolberg et al., 2004] Stollberg, M.; Keller, U.; Fensel. D.: Partner and Service Discovery for Collaboration on the Semantic Web. Proc. 3rd Intl. Conference on Web Services (ICWS 2005), Orlando, Florida, July 2005.
• [Stolberg et al., 2005] M. Stollberg, E. Cimpian, and D. Fensel. Mediating Capabilities with Delta-Relations. In Proceedings of the First International Workshop on Mediation in Semantic Web Services, co-located with the Third International Conference on Service Oriented Computing (ICSOC 2005), Amsterdam, the Netherlands, 2005.
• [Stollberg et al., 2006] Michael Stollberg, Emilia Cimpian, Adrian Mocan, Dieter Fensel: A Semantic Web Mediation Architecture, Canadian Semantic Web Working Symposium (CSWWS 2006), June 2006, Québec city, Canada
• [Zaremba and Bussler, 2005] Zaremba, M. and Bussler, C.: Towards Dynamic Execution Semantics in Semantic Web Services. In Proceedings of the WWW 2005 Workshop on Web Service Semantics: Towards Dynamic Business Integration, 2005.