1 / 12

Nenad Anicic, Nenad Ivezic, Serm Kulvatunyou National Institute of Standards and Technology

An Experimental Assessment of Semantic Web-based Integration Support - Industrial Interoperability Focus -. Nenad Anicic, Nenad Ivezic, Serm Kulvatunyou National Institute of Standards and Technology. Outline. Motivation Objectives XML Schema-based integration OWL DL-based integration

suki
Télécharger la présentation

Nenad Anicic, Nenad Ivezic, Serm Kulvatunyou National Institute of Standards and Technology

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. An Experimental Assessment of Semantic Web-based Integration Support - Industrial Interoperability Focus - Nenad Anicic, Nenad Ivezic, Serm Kulvatunyou National Institute of Standards and Technology

  2. Outline • Motivation • Objectives • XML Schema-based integration • OWL DL-based integration • Expected Contributions • Issues

  3. Motivation • Content standards are hard to implement for application-level interoperability because of : • the lack of explicit application-level semantics in these standards • the very flexible, syntax-level specifications used in the standards • The consequences are : • Costly and effort-intensive translation process among the independently implemented content standards • Hard to test vendor products for application-level interoperability.

  4. Objectives • Assess usability of OWL to support industry interoperability efforts • Develop an experimental toolset that will enable formalization of current content standards • Demonstrate potential positive effects of this formalization on a series of interoperability problems from on-going industrial efforts. • Help design, re-use, and distribution of XML Schema business document

  5. The general application integration situation and target integration capability OAG XML Schema OAG OWL DL STAR OWL DL STAR XML Schema AIAG XML Schema AIAG OWL DL XSLT Mapping DL Reasoner STAR XML data AIAG XML data translation STAR XML data AIAG XML data translation

  6. OWL-based integration approach – expected contributions • Procedure and Tools for • Model-based Equivalence Test of Schema Documents • Validating XML data using OWL-DL reasoner • Semantic equivalence tests between source and target XML instances

  7. Translation Tools Model-based Equivalence of Schema Documents • Create a merged ontology from independently developed STAR and AIAG ontologies • Check for any inconsistencies in the merged ontologies • Identify similarity between two schemas based on the comparison of their respective semantic views We assume that a high degree of equivalence may be obtained assuming common usage of core components as is the case of OAG standard XML Schema STAR XML Schema AIAG OWL DL STAR OWL DL AIAG Equivalent to ? Close to?

  8. Translation Tools OWL DL STAR OWL Instance Validating XML data using OWL-DL reasoner • Validate the XML data with respect to the XML Schema • Translate XML data to OWL instance • Validate the OWL individual with respect to the ontology XML Instance XML Schema OWL DL Conforms to ?

  9. XML-to-OWL Translation Procedure TBOX DL Reasoner XML Schema XSLT OWL DL OAG TBOX DIG interface STAR AIAG XSLT XML Schemainstances ABOX Others interfaces OAG XML-to-OWL Translation tool

  10. OWL DL STAR OWL DL STAR STAR OWL Instance AIAG OWL Instance Semantic Equivalence test between two XML instances • Validate the XML data with respect to the OWL • Add set of assertion to check equivalence XML Schema STAR XML Schema AIAG XML Instance STAR XML Instance AIAG Translation Tools ? = OWL DL OAG STAR AIAG

  11. Mapping Definitions Issues • KEY ISSUE: choose optimal OWL constructs that will be suitable for future reasoning about the original XML schema and in support of interoperability. • What are the necessary and sufficient conditions for identifying an XML BOD component in an OWL model? Can we extract that information from XML Schema? • OAG Resources (i.e., fundamental data elements) define semantically different / similar concepts. • How does one uniquely identify every OAG OWL concept? • How to define constraints which are defined as simpleType definition

  12. Relevant publications [1] D.Trastour, C.Preist , and D.Coleman, “Using Semantic Web Technology to Enhance Current Business-to-Business Integration Approaches”. 7th IEEE International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference, EDOC 2003, Brisbane, Australia, Sept 16-19th , 2003 [2] P.Lehti and P.Fankhauser: XML data integration with OWL: experiences and challenges. Applications and the Internet, 2004. Proceedings. 2004 International Symposium, 26-30 Jan. 2004 Pages:160 – 167 [3] V. Haarslev and R. M¨oller. Description of the RACER system and its applications. In Proceedings InternationalWorkshop on Description Logics (DL-2001), 2001. [4] Web Ontology Language (OWL) Reference Version 1.0,- http://www.daml.org/2002/06/webont/owl-ref-proposed [5] Jena2 Semantic Web Toolkit: http://www.hpl.hp.com/semweb/jena2.htm. [6] A. Boukottaya, C. Vanoirbeek, F. Paganelli, O. Abou Khaled “Automating XML document Transformations: A conceptual modelling based approach” The First Asia-Pacific Conference on Conceptual Modelling, Dunedin, New Zealand, January 18 -- 22, 2004 [7] M.Klein1, D.Fensel1, F.Harmelen, and I.Horrocks “The relation between ontologies and XML schemas” Linkoping Electronic Articles in Computer and Information Science Vol. 6(2001)

More Related