INF5120 – Model-based System Development

1. INF5120 – Model-based System Development Lecture #13: Model-driven interoperability April 27th, 2009 Arne J. Berre, SINTEF ICT Based on material developed in the ATHENA (IST-507849), INTEROP (IST-508011), SHAPE, SWING, COIN and EMPOWER/MEMPOWER, JANUS-3 research projects.

2. Lecture plan - 2009 • 1: 19/1: Introduction to MBSU, MDA, OO and Service/SOA modeling, Overall EA (AJB) • 2: 26/1: MS I: Business Process Modeling (CIM) - with BPMN and BMM (AJB), Objecteering UML Modeler • 3: 2/2: MS II: UML2 and SysML, Objecteering SOA and Scope, – Collaboration /Component models • 4: 9/2: MS III: SoaML I (PIM) and Requirements modeling , CIM->PIM and SoaML (AJB) • 5: 16/2: MDE I: Metamodeling , DSL and UML profiles, MDA technologies (XMI, Eclipse, EMF/GMF) (AJB) • 6: 23/2: MS IV: SOA and Servicve Design, GRASP, Design and SOA Patterns (AJB ) • 7: 2/3: MS V: Method Engineering and SPEM / EPF (BRE) • 8: 9/3: MDE II: Model transformations with ATL, MOFScript and other technologise (GO) • 9 :16/3:: MDE II: Code generation with MOFScript and other technologies (GO) • 10: 23/3: MDE IV: SOA Web services, XSD, WSDL and BPEL (PSM) (BRE) • 11: 30/3: MDI I: SoaML and Model Driven Interoperability I (AJB) • EASTER • 12: 20/4: MDE V: Open ArchitectureWare and BPMN/BPEL with Websphere in practice, (Neil Loughrran, Ismar Slomic) • 12: 20/4: Exercise: MagicDraw and ModelPro with SoaMLfor JEE/Web services in pracrtice (Weiqing Zhang) • 13: 27/4: MDI II: Model Driven Interoperability - II - Semantic services (AJB) , Microsoft Oslo (Anthe Rugstad) • 14: 4/5: Course summary and preparation for Exam 29/5 (AJB) • Exam: May 29th, 2009 (Friday) • AJB – Arne J. Berre • BRE – Brian Elvesæter • GO – Gøran Olsen • ARS – Arnor Solberg

3. OBLIG 2 – Delivery April 27th, Walk through Monday May 4th, 2009 • Use MDA technology in Eclipse (with MOFScript) to generate code for web services (with WSDL, XML, and maybe BPEL), maybe also by using JEE, for the system that was specified in obligatory exercise 1. There might be a need for a further refinement of the models from obligatory exercise 1. The models must be transferred to Eclipse EMF by use of XMI as a basis for further transformation/generation. • Look at example for code generation (provisioning) from SoaML models in the new Cameo SOA+ and ModelPro for Eclipse code generation from MagicDraw and ModelDriven.org. This can be downloaded from www.magicdraw.com (license valid until July 1st 2009). • Discuss in what extent techniques from part III of the course (MDI - Model Driven Interoperability) can be used if our system shall integrate with another system which supports parts of the same functionality.

4. Course literature – available on web – updates available per May 4th, 2009 • Material from all lectures and OBLIG • Some selected articles and documents, and subset of standard documents from OMG • Handbook: ”MDE with Objecteering for SOA” , Softeam and A.J. Berre • Handbook: ”Model Driven Engineering - MDE” , A.J. Berre & B. Elvesæter • Handbook: ”Service Oriented Architectures - SOA” , A.J. Berre & B. Elvesæter • Handbook: ” MDE4SOA with COMET-SE” , A.J. Berre & B. Elvesæter • Handbook: ” Model Driven Interoperability - MDI”, A.J. Berre & B. Elvesæter • Practical use of tools (OBLIG): • Objecteering - www.objecteering.com • MOFScript -http://www.eclipse.org/gmt/mofscript/ • BPMN – http://www.eclipse.org/stp/bpmn • EMF - http://www.eclipse.org/modeling/emf/ • GMF - http://www.eclipse.org/gmf/ • Papyrus UML2 - http://www.papyrusuml.org • ATL - http://www.eclipse.org/gmt/atl/ og http://www.modelbased.net/ • JEE 5.0 - http://java.sun.com/javaee/technologies/

5. Exam • Case-based (ref. previous exams) • All written material can be used • 09-12 (3 hours) – Friday 29 . May 2009

6. Article 1:Organizational interoperability supported through goal alignment with BMM and service collaboration with SoaML I-ESA 2009 paper Han Fenglin, NTNU Arne J. Berre, SINTEF Espen Møller, Oslo University Hospital 22. April. 2009

7. Article 2:Model Driven Service Interoperability through use of Semantic Annotations I-ESA 2009 paper Arne-Jørgen Berre Fangning Liu Jiucheng Xu Brian Elvesæter SINTEF ICT

8. Outline • Introduction • Some existing interoperability framework(EIF) • European SHAPE project (Service-Oriented Heterganeous architecture and platform engineering) • BMM • SoaML • Alignment with BMM and SoaML • Other on going cases of SoaML and BMM

9. Introduction • Organizations are collaborating with other organizations in order to meet their business objectives. • For business optimization, organizations re-structure their business realizations by creating new constellations within an enterprise and across the organizational border that need to interoperate. • Key issue: service network, who is to produce the service, who is to consume the service，business goals. • It seems BMM and SoaML can combine these issues through: • Align goals with service-centric approach.

10. Introduction • BMM: Business motivation model • The Business Motivation Model specification provides a scheme or structure for developing, communicating, and managing business plans in an organized manner. Specifically, the Business Motivation Model does all of the following: • It identifies factors that motivate the establishing of business plans.• It identifies and defines the elements of business plans.• It indicates how all these factors and elements inter-relate. Among these elements are those that provide governance for and guidance to the business — Business Policies and Business Rules. • SoaML: Service-Oriented Architecture Modeling Language • OMG-backed, meant to bring a new type of modeling capability to the service-oriented world (talk in detail later).

11. Reference • Latest BMM specification. • Latest UPMS specification. • SoaML community: http://www.soaml.org/

12. Interoperability Framework • ATHENA Interoperability Framework ( each system is described by enterprise models and different viewpoints, such as business, process, service, information)

13. EIF version 2.0 (2009)European Interoperability Framework

14. Definition: Interoperability(Revised in 2008 in EIF v2, to include common goals !)

15. EIF - Dimensions of Interoperability

16. Interoperability chain and levels

17. Interoperability levels

18. Reference model for Interoperability- Link to areas in IT architecture Admin, Business, Citizen A Admin, Business, Citizen B Organisational interoperability Workprocess Goals Organisation Product Concepts Workprocess Goals Organisation Product Concepts Organisational interoperability Organisational interoperability Organisational harmonisation, in particular around process Semantic interoperability Semantic interoperability, Informasjons Innhold med mening for: Semantic interoperability, Informasjons Innhold med mening for: Presentation Process, rules Services Information/Data Presentation Process, rules Services Information/Data Shared understanding of the meaning/semantics i innhold ved bruk av teknologier for presentasjon/prosess/tjeneste/data Technical interoperabilitet (Technicall standards) Presentation Process, rules Services Data Communikasjon Adm/Metadat Security Techn. sem/org Technical interoperability Technical interoperabilitet (Technicall standards) Presentation Process, rules Services Data Communikasjon Adm/Metadat Security Techn. sem/org Interoperable technologies Communikation Communikation

19. Admin, Business, Citizen A Admin, Business, Citizen B Organisational interoperability Workprocess Goals Organisation Product Concepts Workprocess Goals Organisation Product Concepts Organisational interoperability Organisational interoperability Semantic interoperability Semantic interoperability, Informasjons Innhold med mening for: Semantic interoperability, Informasjons Innhold med mening for: Presentation Process, rules Services Information/Data Presentation Process, rules Services Information/Data Technical interoperabilitet (Technicall standards) Presentation Process, rules Services Data Communikasjon Adm/Metadat Security Techn. sem/org Technical interoperabilitet (Technicall standards) Presentation Process, rules Services Data Communikasjon Adm/Metadat Security Techn. sem/org Technical interoperability Communikation Communikation Organisational Interoperablilitet Semantic Interoperability Technical Interoperability Reference model for Interoperability vs IDAbc EIF version 1

20. SHAPE project

21. Goals EPC CIM Business rules POP* Flexible Business Flexible Business Business processes BPDM, BPMN according to flexible Business business models metamodels business models Business services BMM metamodels Business Models metamodels E - contracts … … transformation engine Transformer Transformation (engine) rules PIM Flexible Executable business Business Models oriented aspects to capture in models processes Web Grid Service interfaces Services Unified and Semantically - Service contracts according to standardised enabled Service enactment Which metamodels and languages to use Service UPMSHA Agents metamodel for heterogeneous Business rules Variability SLAs SOA & SHA SOA model Parameterized Semantic Web P2P Services services Heterogeneous … Platforms transformation - engine Transformer Transformation (engine) rules PSM What service Executable artefacts Heterogeneous XSD, WSDL, BPEL service platforms Teams and plans WSA Semantically - Semantically - Resource JXTA Interconnected enabled enabled Interconnected according to Heterogeneous management OGSA Heterogeneous heterogeneous heterogeneous heterogeneous heterogeneous SOA platforms Semantic Web JACK, JADE SOA platforms SOA platform SOA platform SOA platform SOA platform metamodels Services WSMO, WSMX metamodels models metamodels models models … … MDE for SOA / SHA – using OMG MDA principles

22. From CIM to PIM with BMM and SoaML CIM Business Models … BPMN BPDM BMM EPC SoaML-SHA PIM System Models Core SoaML Service Variability PIMs for different PIM4 PIM4 PIM4 P2P/Grid/ Architectural Styles Components WS-A SWS Agents PSM - S, JACK, JADE, JXTA, OGSA, J2EE, CORBA WSDL, WSMO, OWL Implementation Models Realization Technologies J2EE, NetWeaver , .Net, …

24. BMM • There are three main parts in the BMM. • Firstly, an End comprises things that the enterprise aims at achieving, for example Goals and Objectives. • Secondly, the Means are what the enterprise will employ to achieve Ends, for example Strategies, Tactics, Business Policies, and Business Rules. • Finally, Influencers can change the elements of the business plans through Assessments. The Ends, Means and Influencers are related to each other in order to answer the following fundamental question: What is needed to achieve what the enterprise wants to achieve?

25. BMM and goal modeling • Objective: • reduce in cost and time, while ensuring sufficient quality of the analyses • Means • Establish platform secure exchange of information between health enterprises. • Consume analysis service with lowest cost and shortest process time with sufficient quality. • Influencers

26. BMM summary • The values of BMM: • Secures a holistic assessment of possible actions and consequences, from business goal, business processes to technology. • Simpler options for following up decisions critical to business. What decisions have been made? Who made these decisions? When were the decisions made? • Enables simpler communication across large enterprises, between people in leading roles. • Enhanced traceability between strategy and actions ensures quicker and more correct decisions. Why do we need to do something about this? Which decisions are necessary? What are our business requirements? • Right hand picture is the companies that support BMM in Norway and UK

27. SoaML Profile (part of SoaML - UPMS)

28. Service models - health care examples • collaboration diagram used for representing contracts between the participants that interoperate.

29. Service models - health care examples • Service network

30. Goal alignment with BMM and service collaboration with SoaML Figure on the left shows an example of a business motivation model that captures the following business requirements concerning the processing of purchase orders: · Establish a common means of processing purchase orders. · Ensure orders are processed in a timely manner, and deliver the required goods. · Help minimize stock on hand. · Minimize production and shipping costs This example of a BMM model shows the business vision, the goals that amplify that vision, and the objectives that quantify the goals. It also shows the business mission, the strategies that are part of the mission plan, and the tactics that implement the strategies. Finally the strategies are tied to the goals they support. The example also shows a Process Purchase Order contract that formalizes the requirements into specific roles, responsibilities, and interactions. The Contract indicates what motivation elements it realizes through MeansRealizations.

31. Conclusion • What we have done: • We want to show the capability of SoaML in the organizational interoperability level. The example is service identification from the Norwegian national Health ICT architecture. • What we want to convince: • OMG standard BMM, SoaML can be used not only by business people but also people in the public health and many other domains to reach agreement on the provided and required service, the goals matching them, which support the organizational interoperability.

32. Conclusion • We suggest a : • Organisational Interoperability –by Goal alignment with BMM and service collaboration with SoaML - • requires mutually shared service related goals (ref. Recent EIF v2.0 definition) - we suggest to model goals with BMM and Services with SoaML, and to relate these by fulfillment relationship, in order to provide a concrete basis for the discussion and resolution of organisational interoperability. • More on the current status of the other development • On going industrial cases include one from the Norwegian oil company: • StatoilHydro: Production and process optimizationcases • One iron producing company from Germany: • Saarstahl -Manufacturing planning and control system, Creation and Optimization of Heats and Sequences,

33. Semantic Web andSemantic Web Services OWL-S WSMO SAWSDL

34. The Tree of Knowledge Technologies (Extended fromTop Quadrant) WSMO OWL-S WSDL-S SAWSDL CC EXPRESS ISO 15926

35. Semantic web service technologies • OWL-S (was DAML-S, US) • WSMO (Europe, DERI, STI, OASIS) • WSDL-S (basis for SAWSDL) • SAWSDL (W3C standard)

36. OWL-S Ontology • OWL-S is an OWL ontology to describe Web services • OWL-S leverages on OWL to • Support capability based discovery of Web services • Support automatic composition of Web Services • Support automatic invocation of Web services "Complete do not compete" • OWL-S does not aim to replace the Web services standards rather OWL-S attempts to provide a semantic layer • OWL-S relies on WSDL for Web service invocation (see Grounding) • OWL-s Expands UDDI for Web service discovery (OWL-S/UDDI mapping)

37. OWL-S Upper Ontology • Capability specification • General features of the Service • Quality of Service • Classification in Service • taxonomies • Mapping to WSDL • communication protocol (RPC, HTTP, …) • marshalling/serialization • transformation to and from XSD to OWL • Control flow of the service • Black/Grey/Glass Box view • Protocol Specification • Abstract Messages

38. The Web Service Modeling Ontology (WSMO)

39. WSMO – Web Service Modeling Ontology • WSMO working group includes the WSML working group, which aims at developing a language called Web Service Modeling Language (WSML) that formalizes the Web Service Modeling Ontology (WSMO). • WSMO: an ontology called Web Service Modeling Ontology (WSMO) for describing various aspects related to Semantic Web Services. Taking the Web Service Modeling Framework (WSMF) as a starting point, we refine and extend this framework, and develop an ontology and a description language. • WSML: aims developing a language called Web Service Modeling Language (WSML) that formalizes the Web Service Modeling Ontology (WSMO). Hereby, we have a two fold mission:a) developing a proper formalization language for semantic web services and b) providing a rule-based language for the semantic web

40. WSMF • WSMF [consists of four different main elements for describing semantic Web Services: • (1) ontologies that provide the terminology used by other elements, • (2) goals that define the problems that should be solved by Web Services, • (3) Web Services descriptions that define various aspects of a Web Service, and • (4) mediators which bypass interpretability problems.

41. WSMO Web Service Description Model

42. 42 www.wsmo.org WSMO Working Groups WSMO Conceptual Model & Axiomatization for SWS STI2 CMS WG SEE TC WSML WSMX Formal Language for WSMO Execution Environment for WSMO Ontology & Rule Language for the Semantic Web

43. Semantically-Enabled Service-oriented Architecture

44. SAWSDL - Semantic Annotations for WSDL and XML Schema • W3C Working Draft 10 April 2007 • This specification defines a set of extension attributes for the Web Services Description Language and XML Schema definition language that allows description of additional semantics of WSDL components. The specification defines how such semantic annotation is accomplished using references to semantic models, e.g. ontologies • 3 constructs: modelReference, liftingSchemaMapping, loweringSchemaMapping

45. Model Driven Interoperability(principle)

46. SwApp#1 SwApp#2 Local Software & Data Local Software & Data Architecture for semantic annotation and reconciliation Reference Ontology Sem Annot Set #2 Sem Annot Set #1 Design-time Run-time Internet Sem Rec Rules#1 Sem Rec Rules#2 Reconciliation

47. Model Driven Service Interoperability through use of Semantic Annotations I-ESA 2009 paper Arne-Jørgen Berre Fangning Liu Jiucheng Xu Brian Elvesæter SINTEF ICT

48. Contents • Introduction • Description of EMPOWER and MEMPOWER • EMPOWER Project • MEMPOWER Project • Comparison Semantic mappings • Conclusion & Further work

49. Semantic Adaptation Layer Mediator Services Web Server Semantic Services Registry Transformations Repository Interoperable Enterprise Service Wrapper (5)Transformations Creator (1)WSDL, OWL-S, WSML (3)Ontology Handling Utilities(OWL) Model Repository Legacy System Wrappers (2)Services Semantic Annotator(SAWSDL) Legacy Systems (4)Semantic Map System Interoperability Layer Interoperable Enterprise Service Designer Wrapper Definition and Customization Web Services Repository EMPOWER • an innovative framework for interoperability between enterprise systems • a flexible and extensible architecture • a system environment

50. Semantic Adaptation Layer Mediator Server Semantic Services Registry Transformations Repository (5)Model Transformation Services Wrapper Model Repository (3)ODM (2)SAM (4)Model Map System Interoperability Layer (1)Model Mapping (SoaML) Web Services Repository Wrapper Semaphore Legacy System Wrappers Legacy Systems • Model Transformation Services support the runtime lifting and lowering transformations among messages and ontologies based on the Model Map. MEMPOWER • a Model Driven variant of EMPOWER, • Compare with advantages and disadvantages of Model Driven Interoperability Ontology Definition Meta-model is a family of MOF meta-models, mappings between those meta-models, and a set of profiles that enable ontology modeling through the use of UML-based tools. Semantic Annotation Model editor is used to relate different PIM models and ontology. It is used to annotate the SoaML model with Ontology. • Model Map stores mapping rules. SoaML describes the services models. The Model Mapping in the MEMPOWER includes transformations from models to ontology and ontology to models.