aswc06 tutorial

Slide3: 

Contents & Timeline MORNING SESSION: 09.00 - 10.00: Introduction to Semantic Web Services 10.00 - 10.30: AM coffee break 10.30 - 12.30: WSMX – system presentation and hands-on 12.30 - 14.00: lunch break AFTERNOON SESSION: 14.00 - 15.30: IRS & IRS hands-on Part I 15.30 - 16.00: PM coffee break 16.00 - 17.00: IRS & IRS hands-on Part II 17.00: wrap up - closing

INTRODUCTION – Semantic Web Services –: 

INTRODUCTION – Semantic Web Services – Michael Stollberg

The Vision: 

Static 500 million users more than 3 billion pages WWW URI, HTML, HTTP The Vision

The Vision: 

WWW URI, HTML, HTTP Deficiencies in Automated Information Processing finding extraction representation interpretation maintenance Semantic Web RDF, RDF(S), OWL Static The Vision

The Vision: 

WWW URI, HTML, HTTP Enable Computing over the Web Semantic Web RDF, RDF(S), OWL Dynamic Web Services UDDI, WSDL, SOAP Static The Vision

The Vision: 

WWW URI, HTML, HTTP Automated Web Service Usage Semantic Web RDF, RDF(S), OWL Dynamic Web Services UDDI, WSDL, SOAP Static Semantic Web Services The Vision

Web Services: 

Web Services web-based SOA as new system design paradigm

Deficiencies of WS Technology: 

Deficiencies of WS Technology current technologies allow usage of Web Services but: only syntactical information descriptions syntactic support for discovery, composition and execution => Web Service usability, usage, and integration needs to be inspected manually no semantically marked up content / services no support for the Semantic Web => current Web Service Technology Stack failed to realize the promise of Web Services

Semantic Web Services: 

Semantic Web Technology + Web Service Technology Semantic Web Services => 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 automated discovery, selection, composition, and web-based execution of services

Semantic Web Services: 

Semantic Web Services define exhaustive description frameworks for describing Web Services and related aspects (Web Service Description Ontologies) support ontologies as underlying data model to allow machine supported Web data interpretation (Semantic Web aspect) define semantically driven technologies for automation of the Web Service usage process (Web Service aspect)

Slide13: 

Web Service Usage Process

The Web Service Modelling Ontology – WSMO –: 

The Web Service Modelling Ontology – WSMO – Michael Stollberg Dumitru Roman

Web Service Modeling Ontology: 

Web Service Modeling Ontology Comprehensive Framework for SESA Semantically Empowered Service-Oriented Architecture top level notions = SESA core elements conceptual model + axiomatization ontology & rule language International Consortium (mostly European) started in 2004 78 members from 20 organizations W3C member submission in April 2005

WSMO Working Groups: 

WSMO Working Groups Conceptual Model & Axiomatization for SWS Formal Language for WSMO Ontology & Rule Language for the Semantic Web Execution Environment for WSMO www.wsmo.org

WSMO Top Level Notions: 

WSMO Top Level Notions Objectives that a client wants to achieve by using Web Services Formally specified terminology of 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 W3C submission 13 April 2005

Non-Functional Properties List: 

Non-Functional Properties List Dublin Core Metadata Contributor Coverage Creator Description Format Identifier Language Publisher Relation Rights Source Subject Title Type Quality of Service Accuracy NetworkRelatedQoS Performance Reliability Robustness Scalability Security Transactional Trust Other Financial Owner TypeOfMatch Version

WSMO Ontologies: 

WSMO Ontologies Formally specified terminology of 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 to achieve by using Web Services

Ontology Usage & Principles : 

Ontologies are the ‘data model’ throughout WSMO all WSMO element descriptions rely on ontologies all data interchanged in Web Service usage are ontologies Semantic information processing & ontology reasoning 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 Ontology Usage & Principles

Ontology Specification: 

Non functional properties (see before) 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 (unary range = return value) Instances set of instances that belong to the represented ontology Axioms axiomatic expressions in ontology (logical statement) Ontology Specification

Specification Language: WSML: 

Specification Language: WSML

WSML Conceptual Syntax: 

WSML Conceptual Syntax wsmlVariant _”http://www.wsmo.org/wsml/wsml-syntax/wsml-flight” namespace {_”http://www.example.org/example#”, dc _”http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/”} ontology _”http://www.example.org/exampleOntology” concept ID attr1 ofType A [...] goal _”http://www.example.org/exampleGoal” [...] webService _”http://www.example.org/exampleWS” [...]

WSML Logical Expressions: 

WSML Logical Expressions Frame- and FOL based concrete syntax Elements: Function symbols (e.g. f()) Molecules (e.g. Human subClassOf Animal, John memberOf Human, John[name hasValue “John Smith”]). Predicates (e.g. distance(?x,?y,?z)) Logical connectives (or, and, not, implies, equivalent, impliedBy, forall, exists) Example: ?x memberOf Human equivalent ?x memberOf Animal and ?x memberOf LegalAgent.

WSMO Web Services: 

WSMO Web Services Formally specified terminology of 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 to achieve by using Web Services

WSMO Web Service Description : 

WSMO Web Service Description Web Service Implementation (not of interest in Web Service Description) Choreography --- Service Interfaces --- Capability functional description 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 WS composition Non-functional Properties DC + QoS + Version + financial complete item description quality aspects Web Service Management Orchestration

Capability Specification: 

Capability Specification Non functional properties Imported Ontologies Used mediators OO Mediator: importing ontologies with data level mismatch resolution WG Mediator: link to a Goal wherefore service is not usable a priori Shared Variables: scope is entire capability Pre-conditions what a web service expects in order to be able to provide its service. They define conditions over the input. Assumptions conditions on the state of the world that has to hold before the Web Service can be executed Post-conditions 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)

Example VTA Web Service: 

Example VTA Web Service Web service for booking tickets or complete trips WSMO capability precondition capability VTAcapability sharedVariables {?item, ?passenger, ?creditCard, ?initialBalance, ?reservationPrice} precondition definedBy exists ?reservationRequest (?reservationRequest[ reservationItem hasValue ?item, passenger hasValue ?passenger, payment hasValue ?creditcard] memberOf tr#reservationRequest and (?item memberOf tr#trip or ?item memberOf tr#ticket) and ?passenger memberOf pr#person and ?creditCard memberOf po#creditCard and (?creditCard[type hasValue po#visa] or ?creditCard[type hasValue po#mastercard]) ) .

Example VTA Web Service: 

Example VTA Web Service WSMO capability assumption: the provided credit card is valid the balance of the credit card before executing the service is higher than the price of the reservation (= purchased item) that is retrieved after executing the Web service. assumption definedBy po#validCreditCard(?creditCard) and ?creditCard[balance hasValue ?initialBalance] and (?initialBalance >= ?reservationPrice) .

Example VTA Web Service: 

Example VTA Web Service capability description (post-state) postcondition definedBy exists ?reservation(?reservation[ reservationItem hasValue ?item, price hasValue ?reservationPrice, customer hasValue ?passenger, payment hasValue ?creditcard] memberOf tr#reservation and ?reservationPrice memberOf tr#price) . effect definedBy ?creditCard[po#balance hasValue ?finalBalance] and (?finalBalance = (?initialBalance - ?reservationPrice)).

Choreography & Orchestration: 

Choreography & Orchestration VTA example: Choreography = how to interact with the service to consume its functionality Orchestration = how service functionality is achieved by aggregating other Web Services

Ontologized Abstract State Machines: 

Ontologized Abstract State Machines Description Vocabulary: ontology constructs used in service interface description usage for information interchange: in, out, shared, controlled States: a stable status in the information space defined by attribute values of ontology instances Guarded Transition: state transition general structure: if (condition) then (update) condition on current state, update = changes in state transition all GT(ω) whose condition is fulfilled fire in parallel Usage: partners A, B commence interaction with empty ΩA, ΩB ΩA, ΩB are updated via Guarded Transitions in each state interaction termination state when A, B have no further transition rules

Example Hotel Web Service: 

Example Hotel Web Service choreography interface (state signature) interface htl#BookHotelInterface choreography stateSignature importsOntology htl#simpleHotelOntology in htl#HotelRequest withGrounding _"http://...", htl#HotelConfirm withGrounding _"http://...", htl#HotelCancel withGrounding _"http://..." out htl#HotelNotAvailable withGrounding _"http://...", htl#HotelOffer withGrounding _"http://..." shared htl#Hotel, htl#HotelAvailable, htl#HotelBooked

Example Hotel Web Service: 

Example Hotel Web Service choreography interface (transition rules) ctl_state {htl#start,htl#offerMade,htl#noAvail,htl#confirmed,htl#cancelled} transitionRules if (ctl_state = htl#start) then forall {?req,?date,?loc,?client} with ?req[trv#date hasValue ?date, trv#location hasValue ?loc, htl#client hasValue ?client] memberOf htl#HotelRequest do add(htl#offer(?req)[trv#date hasValue ?date, trv#hotelName hasValue ?name, trv#location hasValue ?loc, htl#client hasValue ?client] memberOf htl#HotelOffer) ctl_state := htl#offerMade | add(htl#notAvailable(?req)[trv#date hasValue ?date, trv#location hasValue ?loc] memberOf htl#HotelNotAvailable) ctl_state := htl#noAvail endForall endIf

WSMO Goals : 

WSMO Goals Formally specified terminology of 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 to achieve by using Web Services

Goals: 

Goals Goal-driven Approach, derived from AI rational agent approach ontological de-coupling of Requester and Provider ‘intelligent’ mechanisms detect suitable services for solving the Goal service re-use & knowledge-level client side support Usage of Goals within Semantic Web Services A Requester (human or machine) defines a Goal to be resolved independently (i.e. subjectively) on the knowledge level SWS techniques / systems automatically determine Web Services to be used for resolving the Goal (discovery, composition, execution, etc.) Goal Resolution Management is realized in implementations client objective specification along with all information needed for automated resolution

Goal-driven Architecture: 

Goal-driven Architecture Goal objective (desired final state) input for service usage goal resolution constraints, preferences, and policies Goal Resolution Plan - goal resolution algorithm decomposition (optional) service usage / invocation corresponds to / creation of defines (Web) Service Implementation (not of interest here) functional behavioral service detection & composition Client-Side Service-Side Domain Knowledge Ontology Ontology Ontology Ontology service usage

Goal Specification: 

Item Description & Terminology Import non-functional properties imported Ontologies & used mediators Requested Capability specifies objective (with PAPE) instantiation for concrete request (concrete input data) Client Choreography counterpart of Web service choreography interface for invocation and consumption of Web services one for each usable Web service described as a WSMO choreography Goal Decomposition defines “desired workflow” collection of subgoals with control- & data flow described as WSMO orchestration Goal Specification

Web Service Discovery: 

Web Service Discovery detect directly usable Web services out of available ones Discovery Techniques 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 Selection: choose most appropriate Web Service with respect to: Quality of Service (security, robustness, availability) context (regional, business / social communities) preferences and policies financial … Ease of provision Attainable Accuracy

Semantic Matchmaking: 

Semantic Matchmaking 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 Keller, U.; Lara, R.; Polleres, A. (Eds): WSMO Web Service Discovery. WSML Working Draft D5.1, 12 Nov 2004.

Web Service Composition: 

Web Service Composition combine several Web services for solving a request composition of Web services is needed if no directly usable Web service exists … a WS can satisfy goal, but goal cannot invoke WS several WS need to be combined in order to achieve goal composition techniques: functional = suitable composition wrt functionalities behavioral = suitable composition wrt behavioral interfaces need to be integrated: skeleton by functional composition refinement + executable code by behavioral composition

Choreography Discovery: 

internal business logic of Web Service (not of interest in Service Interface Description) Choreography Discovery internal business logic of Web Service (not of interest in Service Interface Description) a valid choreography 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

Behavior Compatibility Example: 

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 Choreography Interface WS Choregraphy Interface

WSMO Mediators: 

WSMO Mediators Formally specified terminology of 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 to achieve by using Web Services

Mediation : 

Mediation Heterogeneity … mismatches on structural / semantic / conceptual / level occur between different components that shall interoperate especially in distributed & open environments like the Internet Concept of Mediation (Wiederhold, 94): Mediators as components that resolve mismatches declarative approach: semantic description of resources ‘intelligent’ mechanisms resolve mismatches independent of content mediation cannot be fully automated (integration decision) Levels of Mediation within Semantic Web Services: (0) Representation: heterogeneous Languages & Protocols Data Level: heterogeneous Data Sources Functional Level: heterogeneous Functionalities Process Level: heterogeneous Communication Processes

Representation & Protocol Level Mediation: 

Representation & Protocol Level Mediation interoperability problems due to different representation formalisms different technical communication protocols adaptors for transformation syntactic transformation mappings between language constructs usage: interoperability between systems with different languages (e.g. OWL – WSML, etc.) grounding for Semantic Web services (lifting & lowering between syntactic and semantic level)

Data Mediation Techniques: 

Data Mediation Techniques Ontology Integration Techniques semi-automatic human intervention needed for “integration decision graphical support for ontology mapping as central technique

Functional Level Mediation: 

Functional Level Mediation requested and provided functionalities do not match precisely => conditions under which Web Service is usable for solving a Goal usage constraint explication goal refinement goal adjustment delta-relations = relation & difference of functional descriptions

Process Level Mediation: 

Process Level Mediation not a priori compatible behavior interfaces for communication & information interchange partially resolvable by “process mediation patterns”

WSMO Mediators Overview: 

WSMO Mediators Overview OO Mediator O O / G / WS / M 1 .. n 1 GG Mediator G G 1 .. n 1 ..n WG Mediator G xor WS WS xor G 1 .. n 1 ..n Process Level (Communication) WW Mediator WS WS 1 1 ..n terminology representation & protocol Δ-Relation Mediation data level mediation Δ-Relation Mediation Process Level (Communication) Δ-Relation Mediation technique used imports / reuses correlation Legend Process Level (Cooperation)

Other Approaches: 

Other Approaches WSMO is not the only proposal for an SWS Framework … OWL-S: upper ontology for semantically describing Web services chronologically first, consortium mainly USA SWSF: process model for Web Services result of SWSI (international working group) WSDL-S: semantic annotation of WSDL descriptions LSDIS Lap (Amit Seth Group) and IBM Discussed here: Central Features Commonalities and Differences

OWL-S : 

OWL-S Upper Ontology for Web Service Descriptions capability description (IOPE) non-functional properties usage: (1) WS advertisement, (2) WS request formulation specification of service access information builds upon WSDL to define message structure and physical binding layer specifies communication protocols & language, transport mechanisms, etc. describes internal processes of the service defines service interaction protocol for (a) consumption and (b) WS interaction process types: simple, atomic, composite specifies: (1) abstract messages (ontological content), (2) control flow constructs, (3) perform construct

OWL-S and WSMO: 

OWL-S and WSMO OWL-S = ontology and language to describe Web services WSMO = ontology and language for core elements of Semantic Web Service systems OWL-S Profile ≈ WSMO capability + non-functional properties OWL-S Grounding  current WSMO Grounding OWL-S Process Model  WSMO Service Interfaces Main Description Elements Correlation: Goals and Mediators not in scope deficiencies in Service Model (process description model / language not adequate) => SWSF

OWL and WSML : 

OWL and WSML WSML aims at overcoming deficiencies of OWL OWL Lite OWL DL OWL Full WSML Flight WSML DL WSML Core WSML Rule WSML Full Description Logics full RDF(S) support subset Description Logics Logic Programming First Order Logic

SWSF : 

SWSF Process Model for Web Services (FLOWS) although self-contained, commonly understood as extension of OWL-S / refinement of Service Model

WSDL-S : 

WSDL-S Semantic annotation of WSDL descriptions annotate XML Schema with domain ontology pre-conditions & effects for operations WS categorization by ontology-based keywords <xs:element name="processPOResponse“ type="xs:string wssem:modelReference="POOntology#OrderConfirmation"/> <interface name="PurchaseOrder"> <operation name="processPurchaseOrder” pattern=wsdl:in-out> <input messageLabel=”processPORequest“ element="tns:processPORequest"/> <output messageLabel="processPOResponse“ element="processPOResponse"/> <wssem:precondition name=“AccExistsPrecond“ wssem:modelReference=“onto#AccountExists"> <wssem:effect name="ItemReservedEffect“ wssem:modelReference=“onto#ItemReserved"/> </operation> </interface> <wssem:category name= "Electronics" taxonomyURI="http://www.naics.com/" taxonomyCode="443112" />

Commonalities & Differences : 

Commonalities & Differences similar ontological structure for WS descriptions Functional Descriptions (preconditions & effects) Behavioral Descriptions (consumption and interaction) Grounding to WSDL (automated execution) central conceptual differences formal models for capabilities interfaces vs. business process behavioral aspects: state-based  process models  operation-level capabilities WSMO defines “core elements for SESA” while all others are only concerned with describing Web Services

The Web Service Execution Environment WSMX : 

The Web Service Execution Environment WSMX Omair Shafiq

WSMX Introduction: 

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.

WSMX Motivation: 

WSMX Motivation Middleware ‘glue’ for Semantic Web Services Allow service providers focus on their business Reference implementation for WSMO Eat our own cake Environment for goal based 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

WSMX Usage Scenario: 

WSMX Usage Scenario

WSMX Usage Scenario - P2P: 

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

WSMX Usage Scenario - P2P: 

WSMX Usage Scenario - P2P

Design Principles: 

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

Benefits of SOA: 

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

Service Oriented State: 

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

Messaging: 

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

WSMX Architecture: 

WSMX Architecture Messaging Application Management Service Oriented Architectures

Selected Components: 

Selected Components Adapters Parser Invoker Choreography Process Mediator Discovery Data Mediator Resource Manager Reasoning

Adapters: 

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 RosettaNet 2 WSML WSML 2 RosettaNet EDI 2 WSML WSML 2 EDI UBL 2 WSML WSML 2 UBL Inward Outward Adapter Pool Adapter Manager / Selector Validator ( Message , Protocol ) ... ... ... ... ... ... 2 WSML 2 WSML 2 WSML WSML 2 WSML 2 WSML 2 Metadata Repository

Parser: 

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)

Communication Mgr – Invoker: 

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 Invoker Apache AXIS XML Converter Mediated WSML Data XML Web Service SOAP

Choreography: 

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 - filters, changes or replaces data Receives data from PM and forwards it to the Communication manager - data to be finally sent to the communication partner

Process Mediator: 

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

Process Mediator – Addressed mismatches: 

Process Mediator – Addressed mismatches

Discovery: 

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

Discovery: 

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 Service Descriptions invoke Web Service

Data Mediator: 

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)

Design-time: 

Design-time Inputs Source Ontology and Target Ontology Features Graphical interface Set of mechanism towards semi-automatic creation of mappings Capturing the semantic relationships identified in the process Storing these mappings in a persistent storage Output Abstract representation of the mappings

Design-time Phase: 

Design-time Phase

Design-time Phase - Approach, Decomposition and Mapping Context: 

Design-time Phase - Approach, Decomposition and Mapping Context Bottom-up -> training set Top-down -> decomposition, context

Ontology Mapping Language: 

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 (ex: classMapping, classAtrributeMapping, instanceMapping) mapping operators

Mapping Language Example: 

Ontology O2 Mapping Language Example Human - name Adult Child Person name age michael memberOf Person name = Michael Stollberg age = 28 classMapping(unidirectional o2:Person o1.Adult attributeValueCondition(o2.Person.age >= 18)) this allows to transform the instance ‘michael’ of concept person in ontology O2 into a valid instance of concept ‘adult’ in ontology O1 Ontology O1

Run-Time Data Mediator: 

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

Resource Manager: 

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

Reasoner: 

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

System Entry Points: 

System Entry Points achieveGoal (WSMLDocument): Context getWebServices (WSMLDocument): Context invokeWebService (WSMLDocument, Context): Context

Define “Business” Process: 

Define “Business” Process

Generate Wrappers for Components: 

Generate Wrappers for Components

Context Data: 

Context Data

Event-based Implementation: 

Event-based Implementation

Web Services Modeling Toolkit: 

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

WSML Perspective: 

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)

WSML Perspective: Editors & Views: 

WSML Perspective: Editors & Views Editors WSML Text Editor WSML Conceptual Editor WSML Visualizer Views Navigator view Problems view WSML Reasoner

WSML Perspective: Editors & Views: 

Editors WSML Text Editor WSML Conceptual Editor WSML Visualizer Views Navigator view Problems view WSML Reasoner WSML Perspective: Editors & Views

WSML Perspective: Editors & Views: 

Editors WSML Text Editor WSML Conceptual Editor WSML Visualizer Views Navigator view Problems view WSML Reasoner WSML Perspective: Editors & Views

WSML Perspective: Editors & Views: 

Editors WSML Text Editor WSML Conceptual Editor WSML Visualizer Views Navigator view Problems view WSML Reasoner WSML Perspective: Editors & Views

WSML Perspective: Editors & Views: 

Editors WSML Text Editor WSML Conceptual Editor WSML Visualizer Views Navigator view Problems view WSML Reasoner WSML Perspective: Editors & Views

WSML Perspective: Editors & Views: 

Editors WSML Text Editor WSML Conceptual Editor WSML Visualizer Views Navigator view Problems view WSML Reasoner WSML Perspective: Editors & Views

WSML Perspective: Editors & Views: 

Editors WSML Text Editor WSML Conceptual Editor WSML Visualizer Views Navigator view Problems view WSML Reasoner WSML Perspective: Editors & Views

Abstract Mapping Language: Editors & Views: 

Abstract Mapping Language: Editors & Views Editors AML Text Editor AML Conceptual Editor AML View Based Editor Views Concept 2 Concept View Attribute 2 Attribute View Concept 2 Attribute View Attribute 2 Concept View Status View

Abstract Mapping Language: Editors & Views: 

Editors AML Text Editor AML Conceptual Editor AML View Based Editor Views Concept 2 Concept View Attribute 2 Attribute View Concept 2 Attribute View Attribute 2 Concept View Status View Abstract Mapping Language: Editors & Views

Abstract Mapping Language: Editors & Views: 

Editors AML Text Editor AML Conceptual Editor AML View Based Editor Views Concept 2 Concept View Attribute 2 Attribute View Concept 2 Attribute View Attribute 2 Concept View Status View Abstract Mapping Language: Editors & Views

Abstract Mapping Language: Editors & Views: 

Editors AML Text Editor AML Conceptual Editor AML View Based Editor Views Concept 2 Concept View Attribute 2 Attribute View Concept 2 Attribute View Attribute 2 Concept View Status View Abstract Mapping Language: Editors & Views

Abstract Mapping Language: Editors & Views: 

Editors AML Text Editor AML Conceptual Editor AML View Based Editor Views Concept 2 Concept View Attribute 2 Attribute View Concept 2 Attribute View Attribute 2 Concept View Status View Abstract Mapping Language: Editors & Views

Abstract Mapping Language: Editors & Views: 

Editors AML Text Editor AML Conceptual Editor AML View Based Editor Views Concept 2 Concept View Attribute 2 Attribute View Concept 2 Attribute View Attribute 2 Concept View Status View Abstract Mapping Language: Editors & Views

Abstract Mapping Language: Editors & Views: 

Editors AML Text Editor AML Conceptual Editor AML View Based Editor Views Concept 2 Concept View Attribute 2 Attribute View Concept 2 Attribute View Attribute 2 Concept View Status View Abstract Mapping Language: Editors & Views

Abstract Mapping Language: Editors & Views: 

Editors AML Text Editor AML Conceptual Editor AML View Based Editor Views Concept 2 Concept View Attribute 2 Attribute View Concept 2 Attribute View Attribute 2 Concept View Status View Abstract Mapping Language: Editors & Views

Conclusions: 

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 http://sourceforge.net/projects/wsmx/ Event-driven component architecture WSMT – emerging tool to handle semantics

Slide110: 

WSMX Hands-on Session overview Download URL: www.wsmo.org/TR/d17/tutorials/aswc06-swstutorial.html Omair Shafiq Emilia Cimpian Dumitru Roman Michal Zaremba

Use Case: 

Use Case Blue company Service Requestor, wants to buy computers and accessories Moon company Service Provider, selling computer products WSMX Acting as middleware to bring together Blue and Moon companies and to manage conversation between them

Why WSMX ?: 

Why WSMX ? Blue company wants to buy computers but does not know any vendors Service discovery required Blue does not want to change the data format with which it communicates or the order of the messages it exchanges Data mediation and process mediation required Blue does not want to be bound to any one provider

Application Scenario: 

Application Scenario WSMO Goal Description WSMO Service Description

Discovery Scenario Overview: 

Discovery Scenario Overview Blue’s Goal Purchase: 20 power supplies for IBM R50 Notebooks 20 SDRAM modules à 512 MB. Shipment 5 Notebooks R50 to customer in Bristol, UK Moon’s Service Sells and ships computers and accessories

Interaction Scenario: 

Interaction Scenario

Solution: Overview of Integration Stages: 

Solution: Overview of Integration Stages 1 – Sending Request Blue sends PO request 2 – Discovery and Conversation Setup Discovery of service, setup of conversation 3 – Conversation with Requestor Blue RosettaNet System: accepting purchase order request 4 – Conversation with Provider CRM and OMS systems: opening order, adding line items, closing order 5 – Conversation with Requestor order confirmation, end of conversation

Implementation & Demonstration: 

Implementation & Demonstration Blue company Moon company

The Internet Reasoning Service IRS III : 

The Internet Reasoning Service IRS III John Domingue Liliana Cabral

Slide119: 

The Internet Reasoning Service is an infrastructure for publishing, locating, executing and composing Semantic Web Services

Design Principles: 

Design Principles Ontological separation of User and Web Service Contexts Capability Based Invocation Ease of Use One Click Publishing Agnostic to Service Implementation Platform Connected to External Environment Open Complete Descriptions Inspectable Interoperable with SWS Frameworks and Platforms

Features of IRS-III (1/2): 

Features of IRS-III (1/2) Based on Soap messaging standard Provides Java API for client applications Provides built-in brokering and service discovery support Provides capability-centred service invocation

Features of IRS-III (2/2): 

Features of IRS-III (2/2) Publishing support for variety of platforms Java, Lisp, Web Applications, Java Web Services Enables publication of ‘standard code’ Provides clever wrappers One-click publishing of web services Integrated with standard Web Services world Semantic web service to IRS ‘Ordinary’ web service

IRS-III Framework: 

IRS-III Framework

IRS-III Architecture: 

IRS-III Architecture LispWeb Server IRS-III Server WS Publisher Registry SOAP Handler SOAP Publishing Platforms Web Service Java Code Web Application SOAP WSMO Studio

Publishing Platform Architecture: 

Publishing Platform Architecture IRS-III Publishing Platform HTTP Server SOAP Handler Service Registrar Service Invoker WS Service Registry IRS-III Server Invocation Client SOAP SOAP SOAP Web Service 1 Web Service 2 Web Service 3

IRS-III/WSMO differences: 

IRS-III/WSMO differences Underlying language OCML Goals have inputs and outputs IRS-III broker finds applicable web services via mediators Used mediator within WS capability Mediator source = goal Web services have inputs and outputs ‘inherited’ from goal descriptions Web service selected via assumption (in capability)

SWS Creation & Usage Steps: 

SWS Creation & Usage Steps Create a goal description (e.g. exchange-rate-goal) Add input and output roles Include role type and soap binding Create a wg-mediator description Source = goal Possibly add a mediation service Create a web service description Used-mediator of WS capability = wg-mediator above Specify Operation <-> Lisp function mapping in Choreography Grounding Publish against web service description Invoke web service by ‘achieve goal’

Multiple Web Services for goal: 

Multiple Web Services for goal Each WS has a mediator for used-mediator slot of capability Some WS may share a mediator Define a kappa expression for assumption slot of WS capability Kappa expression format (kappa (?ws) <ocml relations>) Getting the value of an input role (wsmo-role-value ?ws <role-name>)

Defining a Mediation Service: 

Defining a Mediation Service Define a wg-mediator Mediation-service -> WSMO Goal Mediation goal Mediation goal input roles are a subset of wg-mediator source goal input roles Define corresponding mediator and WS for the mediation goal above

Valid Relations: 

Valid Relations Classes are unary relations e.g. (country ?x) Slots are binary relations e.g. (is-capital-of ?x ?y) Standard relations in base (OCML toplevel) ontology =, ==, <, >, member

European Currency Assumption: 

European Currency Assumption (kappa (?ws) (member (wsmo-role-value ?ws 'has_source_currency) '(euro pound)))

Goal Based Invocation: 

Goal Based Invocation Instantiate Goal Description Exchange-rate-goal Has-source-currency: us-dollars Has-target-currency: pound Web Service Discovery European-exchange-rate-ws Non-european-exchange-rate-ws European-bank-exchange-rate-ws Solve Goal Goal -> WG Mediator -> WS/Capability/Used-mediator Web service selection European-exchange-rate Mediate input values ‘$’ -> us-dollar WS -> Capability -> Assumption expression Mediation Invoke selected web service European-exchange-rate Invocation

WSMO Studio: 

WSMO Studio Integrated Service Environment for WSMO Provide easy to use GUI for various WSMO tasks Working with ontologies Creating WSMO descriptions: goals, services, mediators Creating WSMO centric orchestration and choreography specifications Import (export) from (to) various formats Front-end for ontology and service repositories Front-end for runtime SWS environments (WSMX, IRS-III) http://www.wsmostudio.org

WSMO Studio: 

WSMO Studio Java based implementation Open Source core LGPL 3rd party contributors are free to choose their respective licensing terms Modular design an Eclipse based plug-in architecture Extensible 3rd parties may contribute new functionality (plug-ins) or modify existing functionality

Editing a Goal in WSMO Studio: 

Editing a Goal in WSMO Studio

WSMO Studio view onto IRS-III: 

WSMO Studio view onto IRS-III

Hands-On Session with IRS III : 

Hands-On Session with IRS III Liliana Cabral John Domingue

European Travel Scenario: 

European Travel Scenario

European Travel Demo : 

European Travel Demo

Goal Description in Tutorial: 

Goal Description in Tutorial Goal Capability Interface Precondition Assumption Postcondition Effect Choreography Orchestration State Signature Transition Rules State Signature The steps that go into describing a goal in the tutorial are: Ontological description of the communications (request and response); Creation of a goal; Attachment of a choreography; Attachment of a state signature Attachment of communications to state signature: request as OUT mode; response as IN mode

Web Service Description in Tutorial: 

Web Service Description in Tutorial The steps that go into describing a service in the tutorial are: Ontological description of the communications (may be reused from goal); Creation of a service; possibly attachment of an assumption Attach a used-mediator (wg-mediator); Attachment of a choreography; Attachment of a state signature Attachment of communications to state signature request as IN mode, grounded to LISP function; response as OUT mode Capability Interface Precondition Assumption Postcondition Effect Choreography Orchestration State Signature Transition Rules Web Service

Mediator Description in Tutorial: 

Mediator Description in Tutorial The steps that go into describing a mediator in the tutorial are: Creation of a wg-mediator (possibly involving a mediation service); The mediation service is another SWS (goal, mediator, and ws descriptions) Attachment of a source (the goal defined before) WG-Mediator Source Target Mediation Service Mapping Rules

IRS-III Hands On Task: 

IRS-III Hands On Task Develop the SWS for an application for the European Travel scenario. The application should support a person booking a train ticket between 2 European cities at a specific time and date The following WSMO Studio tasks are involved: Retrieve domain ontologies from IRS; Create WSML ontology concepts to describe communications; Create WSMO descriptions for Goals, WG-mediators and Web service descriptions; Export these definitions to the IRS; Create WSML ontology instances of the requests; Achieve the goals against these instances.

Tutorial Setup: 

Tutorial Setup Travel Services (3001) IRS Lisp Publisher IRS Server (3000) Domain Models WSMO Studio

Travel Related Knowledge Models: 

Travel Related Knowledge Models

Key Classes, Relations, Instances : 

Key Classes, Relations, Instances Is-in-country <city> <country> e.g. (is-in-country berlin germany) -> true (student <person>) -> true, for john matt michal (business-person <person>) -> true, for liliana michael

Goals: 

Goals 1- Get train timetable Inputs: origin and destination cities (city), date (date-and-time, e.g. (18 4 2004)) Output: timetable (string) 2- Book train Inputs: passenger name (person), origin and destination cities, departure time-date (list-date-and-time, e.g. (20 33 16 15 9 2004)) Output: booking information (string)

Services: 

Services 1 service available for goal 1 No constraints 6 services available for goal 2 As a provider write the constraints applicable to the services to satisfy the goal (assumption logical expressions) 1 wg-mediator mediation-service Used to convert time in list format to time in universal format

Service constraints: 

Service constraints Services 2-5 Services for (origin and destination) cities in determined countries Service 4-5 Need a mediation service to map goal time-date to service time-date Services 6-7 Services for students or business people in Europe

Available Functions (1/3): 

Available Functions (1/3) 1- get-train-times paris london (18 4 2004) "Timetable of trains from PARIS to LONDON on 18, 4, 2004 5:18 …23:36" 2- book-english-train-journey christoph milton-keynes london (20 33 16 15 9 2004) "British Rail: CHRISTOPH is booked on the 66 going from MILTON-KEYNES to LONDON at 16:49, 15, SEPTEMBER 2004. The price is 169 Euros." 3- book-french-train-journey sinuhe paris lyon (3 4 6 18 8 2004) "SNCF: SINUHE is booked on the 511 going from PARIS to LYON at 6:12, 18, AUGUST 2004. The price is 27 Euros."

Available Functions (2/3): 

Available Functions (2/3) 4- book-german-train-journey christoph berlin frankfurt 3304251200 "First Class Booking German Rail (Die Bahn): CHRISTOPH is booked on the 323 going from BERLIN to FRANKFURT at 17:11, 15, SEPTEMBER 2004. The price is 35 Euros." 5- book-austrian-train-journey sinuhe vienna innsbruck 3304251200 "Austrian Rail (OBB): SINUHE is booked on the 367 going from VIENNA to INNSBRUCK at 16:47, 15, SEPTEMBER 2004. The price is 36 Euros. "

Available Functions (3/3): 

Available Functions (3/3) 6- book-student-european-train-journey john london nice (3 4 6 18 8 2004) "European Student Rail Travel: JOHN is booked on the 916 going from LONDON to NICE at 6:44, 18, AUGUST 2004. The price is 94 Euros. " 7- book-business-european-train-journey liliana paris innsbruck (3 4 6 18 8 2004) "Business Europe: LILIANA is booked on the 461 going from PARIS to INNSBRUCK at 6:12, 18, AUGUST 2004. The price is 325 Euros." 8- mediate-time (lisp function) or JavaMediateTime/mediate (java) (9 30 17 20 9 2004) 3304686609

Wrap-UpStandardization Market Prospect Future Issues : 

Wrap-Up Standardization Market Prospect Future Issues Michael Stollberg

Tutorial Wrap-up: 

Tutorial Wrap-up The targets of the presented tutorial were to: understand aims & challenges within Semantic Web Services understand WSMO and other frameworks design principles & paradigms core elements commonalities and differences understand semantic techniques for automated Web service usage and give: .. Semantic Web Service Tools and System Presentation .. do-it-yourself Hands-On Session => you should now be able to assess technologies & products for Semantic Web Services and utilize these for your future work

History I : 

History I late 90s: TBL wants the Internet to develop further HTML is unstructured => not processable by machines New kinds of Web Technologies needed => “turn the internet from a world-wide information repository for human consumption into a device of world-wide distributed computation” (Fensel & Bussler, WSMF) American Scientific Article “The Semantic Web” Pete & Lucy: a future example Core Technologies: Ontologies: unambiguous terminology definition in machine- readable format (“Semantics”) Web Services: functionality evocable over the Internet, re-usable and combinable distributed software components Agents: electronic representatives that perform tasks on behalf of his owner Rising attention in Research & Industry ..

History II : 

History II 1999: first W3C Recommendations Specifications of XML Technologies (XSL, XTL,…) Semantic Web Layer Cake Languages: XML, RDF 2000 – 2001: first R&D-activities 1. Web Service Technology Specifications: SOAP, WSDL, UDDI related research areas become interested (AI / Knowledge Engineering; distributed computing, etc.), first projects: DAML (US), OnToKnowledge, etc. “1st Semantic Web Working Symposium”, Stanford (USA), ca. 100 participants 2002 – 2003: research & industry sets off SDK-Cluster (Europe), DAML efforts (USA) initial research results, still very chaotic / without a “framework” industrial efforts on Web services ISWC 02 / 03: double number of participants each year 2004 ff: the hot phase W3C recommendations (OWL, XML + RDF revisions, others) first set of research & development results rising industrial & commercial attention

Standardization Efforts W3C: 

Standardization Efforts W3C 1st set of recommendations in 1999 / 2000, currently revised Semantic Web Services Member Submissions: OWL-S, WSMO, SWSF, WSDL-S Working Groups: Semantic Web Service Interest Group Semantic Annotations for WSDL Group => standardization need acknowledged, but no agreement yet on what & how

Layer Cake - Revised: 

Layer Cake - Revised W3C Semantic Web Language Layer Cake revised version, Tim-Berners-Lee 2005

Industrial Efforts: 

Industrial Efforts Semantics & SOA Developments Microsoft Longhorn / Vista / Biztalk Server 2006 / … IBM IBM SOA Foundation SAP Net Weaver Oracle Oracle SOA Suite Sun SOA Initiative (future developments) OASIS non-profit, joint industrial for e-business technology development & standardization committees for Web Services & SOA (ebSOA, FWSI, SEE, etc.)

Market Prospects: 

Market Prospects Application Areas Knowledge Management Enterprise Application Integration E-Commerce (B2C and B2B) E-Government … many more SESA = enabling technology for the 21st century Market Prospects: 2006 / 07: Technology Development & Dissemination 2008: Break Even Point / ROI 2010: Commercialization (40 – 60 billion dollar market)

Slide161: 

Market Development (Gartner)

Estimated Market in 2010 : 

Estimated Market in 2010 $ 52.4 billion dollar market

Future Items: 

Future Items proof of concept & applicability current works developed & tested in mainly academic settings which approaches techniques are adequate (functional, scalable, etc.) realizable large scale real world use cases needed Ontology & WS description management Ontologies as data model => the (Web) world needs to be ontologized Web service descriptions must be correct & maintained complicated task can not be automated (knowledge level lifting) qualified Knowledge Engineers needed

ReferencesAcknowledgements: 

References Acknowledgements

References Foundations: 

References Foundations [Alonso et al., 2004] Alonso, G., Casati, F., Kuno, H., and Machiraju, V. (2004). Web Services: Concepts, Architectures and Applications. Data-Centric Systems and Applications. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. [Berners-Lee, 1999] Berners-Lee, T. (1999). Weaving the Web. Harper, San Francisco, USA. [Berners-Lee et al., 2001] Berners-Lee, T., Hendler, J., and Lassila, O. (2001). The Semantic Web. Scientific American, 284(5):34-43. [Bussler, 2003] Bussler, C. (2003). B2B Integration: Concepts and Architecture. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. [Fensel, 2003] Fensel, D. (2003). Ontologies: A Silver Bullet for Knowledge Management and E-Commerce. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2 edition. [Goméz-Pérez et al., 2003] Goméz-Pérez, A., Corcho, O., and Fernandez-Lopez, M. (2003). Ontological Engineering. With Examples from the Areas of Knowledge Management, E-Commerce and Semantic Web. Series of Advanced Information and Knowledge Processing. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. [Gruber, 1993] Gruber, T. R. (1993). A translation approach to portable ontology specifications. Knowledge Acquisition, 5:199-220.

References Semantic Web Services: 

References Semantic Web Services [de Bruijn et al., 2006] de Bruijn, J., Fensel, D., Lausen, H., Polleres, A., Roman, D., and Stollberg, M. (2006). Enabling Semantic Web Services. The Web Service Modeling Ontology. Springer. [Fensel and Bussler, 2002] Fensel, D. and Bussler, C. (2002). The Web Service Modeling Framework WSMF. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 1(2). [McIlraith et al., 2001] McIlraith, S., Cao Son, T., and Zeng, H. (2001). Semantic Web Services. IEEE Intelligent Systems, Special Issue on the Semantic Web, 16(2):46-53. [Preist, 2004] Preist, C. (2004). A Conceptual Architecture for Semantic Web Services. In Proc. of the Int. Semantic Web Conf. (ISWC 2004). [Roman et al., 2005] Roman, D., Keller, U., Lausen, H., de Bruijn, J., Lara, R., Stollberg, M., Polleres, A., Feier, C., Bussler, C., and Fensel, D. (2005). Web Service Modeling Ontology. Applied Ontology, 1(1):77-106. [Stollberg et al., 2006] Stollberg, M., Feier, C., Roman, D., and Fensel, D. (2006). Semantic Web Services - Concepts and Technology. In Ide, N., Cristea, D., and Tufis, D. (editors), Language Technology, Ontologies, and the Semantic Web. Kluwer Publishers. [Sycara et al. 2003] Katia Sycara, Massimo Paolucci, Anupriya Ankolekar and Naveen Srinivasan, "Automated Discovery, Interaction and Composition of Semantic Web services," Journal of Web Semantics, Volume 1, Issue 1, September 2003, pp. 27-46

References SWS: W3C Submissions: 

References SWS: W3C Submissions OWL-S [Martin, 2004] Martin, D. (2004). OWL-S: Semantic Markup for Web Services. W3C Member Submission 22 November 2004. online: http://www.w3.org/Submission/OWL-S/. WSMO [see also www.wsmo.org] [Lausen et al., 2005] Lausen, H., Polleres, A., and Roman (eds.), D. (2005). Web Service Modeling Ontology (WSMO). W3C Member Submission 3 June 2005. online: http://www.w3.org/Submission/WSMO/. SWSF [Battle et al., 2005] Battle, S., Bernstein, A., Boley, H., Grosof, B., Gruninger, M., Hull, R., Kifer, M., D., M., S., M., McGuinness, D., Su, J., and Tabet, S. (2005). Semantic Web Services Framework (SWSF). W3C Member Submission 9 September 2005. online: http://www.w3.org/Submission/SWSF/. WSDL-S [Akkiraju et al., 2005] Akkiraju, R., Farrell, J., Miller, J., Nagarajan, M., Schmidt, M.- T., Sheth, A., and Verma, K. (2005). Web Service Semantics - WSDL-S. W3C Member Submission 7 November 2005. online: http://www.w3.org/Submission/WSDL-S/.

References Discovery: 

References Discovery B. Benatallah, M. Hacid, C. Rey, F. Toumani Towards Semantic Reasoning for Web Services Discovery,. In Proc. of the International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC 2003), 2003 Herzog, R.; Lausen, H.; Roman, D.; Zugmann, P.: WSMO Registry. WSMO Working Draft D10 v0.1, 26 April 2004. Keller, U.; Lara, R.; Polleres, A. (Eds): WSMO Web Service Discovery. WSML Working Draft D5.1, 12 Nov 2004. 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. 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 Lara, R., Lausen, H.; Toma, I.: (Eds): WSMX Discovery. WSMX Working Draft D10 v0.2, 07 March 2005. 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.

References Discovery: 

References Discovery 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 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), 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 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 Preist, C.: A Conceptual Architecture for Semantic Web Services. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC 2004), 2004, pp. 395 - 409. 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.

References Composition: 

References Composition [Berardi et al., 2003] Berardi, D., Calvanese, D., Giacomo, G. D., Lenzerini, M., and Mecella, M. (2003). Automatic Composition of e-Services that Export their Behavior. In Proc. of First Int. Conference on Service Oriented Computing (ICSOC). [Martens, 2003] Martens, A. (2003). On Compatibility of Web Services. Petri Net Newletter, 65:12-20. [Sirin et al., 2004] Sirin, E., Parsia, B., Wu, D., Hendler, J., and Nau, D. (2004). HTN Planning for Web Service Composition Using SHOP2. Journal of Web Semantics, 1(4):377-396. [Pistore and Traverso, 2006] Pistore, M. and Traverso, P. (2006). Theoretical Integration of Discovery and Composition. Deliverable D2.4.6, Knowledge Web. [Stollberg, 2005] Stollberg, M. (2005). Reasoning Tasks and Mediation on Choreography and Orchestration in WSMO. In Proceedings of the 2nd International WSMO Implementation Workshop (WIW 2005), Innsbruck, Austria. [Traverso and Pistore, 2004] Traverso, P. and Pistore, M. (2004). Automatic Composition of Semantic Web Services into Executable Processes. In Proc. 3rd International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC 2004), Hiroshima, Japan.

References Mediation: 

References Mediation [Cimpian and Mocan, 2005] Cimpian, E. and Mocan, A. (2005). WSMX Process Mediation Based on Choreographies. In Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Web Service Choreography and Orchestration for Business Process Management at the BPM 2005, Nancy, France. [Mocan (ed.), 2005] Mocan (ed.), A. (2005). WSMX Data Mediation. WSMX Working Draft D13.3. available at: http://www.wsmo.org/TR/d13/d13.3/v0.2/. [Mocan et al., 2005] Mocan, A., Cimpian, E., Stollberg, M., Scharffe, F., and Scicluna, J. (2005). WSMO Mediators. WSMO deliverable D29 ¯nal draft 21 Dec 2005. available at: http://www.wsmo.org/TR/d29/. [Scharffe and de Bruijn, 2005] Scharffe, F. and de Bruijn, J. (2005). A language to specify mappings between ontologies. In Proc. of the Internet Based Systems IEEE Conference (SITIS05). [Stollberg et al., 2006] Stollberg, M., Cimpian, E., Mocan, A., and Fensel, D. (2006). A Semantic Web Mediation Architecture. In Proceedings of the 1st Canadian Semantic Web Working Symposium (CSWWS 2006), Quebec, Canada. [Wiederhold, 1994] Wiederhold, G. (1994). Mediators in the Architecture of the Future Information Systems. Computer, 25(3):38-49.

References WSMO: 

References WSMO 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/

References IRS III: 

References IRS III J. Domingue, L. Cabral, F. Hakimpour, D. Sell and E. Motta: IRS-III: A Platform and Infrastructure for Creating WSMO-based Semantic Web Services. Proceedings of the Workshop on WSMO Implementations (WIW 2004) Frankfurt, Germany, September 29-30, 2004, CEUR Workshop Proceedings, ISSN 1613-0073, online http://CEUR-WS.org/Vol-113/paper3.pdf. J. Domingue and S. Galizia: Towards a Choreography for IRS-III. Proceedings of the Workshop on WSMO Implementations (WIW 2004) Frankfurt, Germany, September 29-30, 2004, CEUR Workshop Proceedings, ISSN 1613-0073, online http://CEUR-WS.org/Vol-113/paper7.pdf. Cabral, L., Domingue, J., Motta, E., Payne, T. and Hakimpour, F. (2004). Approaches to Semantic Web Services: An Overview and Comparisons. In proceedings of the First European Semantic Web Symposium (ESWS2004); 10-12 May 2004, Heraklion, Crete, Greece. Motta, E., Domingue, J., Cabral, L. and Gaspari, M. (2003) IRS-II: A Framework and Infrastructure for Semantic Web Services. In proceedings of the 2nd International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC2003) 20-23 October 2003, Sundial Resort, Sanibel Island, Florida, USA. These papers and software downloads can be found at: http://kmi.open.ac.uk/projects/irs

Acknowledgements: 

Acknowledgements The WSMO working groups are funded by the European Commission under the projects DIP, Knowledge Web, SEKT, SWWS, ASG, and SUPER; by Science Foundation Ireland under the DERI-Lion project; and by the Vienna city government under the FIT-IT Programme in the projects RW2 and TSC. We dedicate thanks to all the members of the WSMO, WSML, and WSMX working groups for their advice and input into this tutorial.