1
2
Semantic Web Service Tutorial
Katia Sycara
Michael Stollberg
Stefania Galizia
Massimo Paolucci
Matthew Moran
Barry Norton
Michal Zaremba
Liliana Cabral
Mick Kerrigan
John Domingue
Emilia Cimpian
Carnegie Mellon
University
3
Agenda
•
Part I: Introduction to Semantic Web Services
09.00 – 09.30
•
Part II: SWS Description Frameworks
09.30 – 12.00
– OWL-S
coffee break 10.15 – 10.45
– WSMO
lunch 12.00 – 01.00
•
01.00 – 01.45
Part III: SWS Techniques and Systems
– Discovery, Composition, Invocation, Mediation
– OWL-S IDE, WSMX, IRS
•
01.45 – 04.00
Part IV: Hands-On Session
– Tools presentation
coffee break 02.15 – 02.45
– OWL-S IDE, WSMX
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
4
PART I:
Introduction to Semantic Web
Services
Michael Stollberg
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
5
Contents
•
The vision of the Semantic Web
•
Ontologies as the basic building block
•
Current Web Service Technologies
•
Vision and Challenges for Semantic Web Services
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
6
The Vision
– 500 million users
– more than 3 billion pages
Static
WWW
URI, HTML, HTTP
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
7
The Vision
Serious Problems in
•
•
•
•
•
Static
information finding,
information extracting,
information representing,
information interpreting and
and information maintaining.
WWW
Semantic Web
URI, HTML, HTTP
RDF, RDF(S), OWL
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
8
The Vision
Dynamic
Static
Web Services
UDDI, WSDL, SOAP
Bringing the computer back
as a device for computation
WWW
Semantic Web
URI, HTML, HTTP
RDF, RDF(S), OWL
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
9
The Vision
Bringing the web to its full potential
Dynamic
Static
UDDI, WSDL, SOAP
Semantic Web
Services
WWW
Semantic Web
URI, HTML, HTTP
RDF, RDF(S), OWL
Web Services
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
10
The Semantic Web
• 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 Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
11
Ontology Definition
unambiguous
terminology definitions
conceptual model
of a domain
(ontological theory)
formal, explicit specification of a shared conceptualization
machine-readability
with computational
semantics
commonly accepted
understanding
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
12
Ontology Example
Concept
name
conceptual entity of the domain
Person
matr.-nr.
Property
research
field
isA – hierarchy (taxonomy)
attribte describing a concept
Student
Professor
attends
Relation
relationship between concepts
or properties
Axiom
email
coherency description between
Concepts / Properties /
Relations via logical expressions
holds
Lecture
lecture
nr.
topic
holds(Professor, Lecture) =>
Lecture.topic = Professor.researchField
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
13
Ontology Technology
To make the Semantic Web working we need:
•
Ontology Languages:
–
–
–
•
Ontology Reasoning:
–
–
–
•
editing and browsing
storage and retrieval
versioning and evolution Support
Ontology Integration Techniques:
–
–
•
large scale knowledge handling
fault-tolerant
stable & scalable inference machines
Ontology Management Techniques:
–
–
–
•
expressivity
reasoning support
web compliance
ontology mapping, alignment, merging
semantic interoperability determination
and … Applications
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
14
Web Services
• loosely coupled, reusable components
• encapsulate discrete functionality
• distributed
• programmatically accessible over standard
internet protocols
• add new level of functionality on top of the
current web
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
15
The Promise of Web Services
web-based SOA as new system design paradigm
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
16
WSDL
• Web Service Description Language
• W3C effort, WSDL 2 final construction phase
describes interface for
consuming a Web Service:
- Interface: operations (in- & output)
- Access (protocol binding)
- Endpoint (location of service)
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
17
UDDI
• Universal Description, Discovery, and Integration Protocol
• OASIS driven standardization effort
Registry for
Web Services:
- provider
- service information
- technical access
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
18
SOAP
• Simple Object Access Protocol
• W3C Recommendation
XML data transport:
- sender / receiver
- protocol binding
- communication aspects
- content
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
19
Lackings 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, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
20
Semantic Web Services
Semantic Web Technology
• allow machine supported data interpretation
• ontologies as data model
+
Web Service Technology
automated discovery, selection, composition,
and web-based execution of services
=> Semantic Web Services as integrated solution for
realizing the vision of the next generation of the Web
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
21
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 data interpretation
(Semantic Web aspect)
• define semantically driven technologies for
automation of the Web Service usage process
(Web Service aspect)
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
22
Web Service Usage Process
1. Deployment
2. Discovery
3. Composition
4. Selection
5. Mediation
6. Execution
create & publish Web service
description
determine usable services for a
request
combine services to achieve a goal
choose most appropriate service
among the available ones
solve mismatches (data, protocol,
process) that hamper interoperation
invoke Web services following
programmatic conventions
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
23
Web Service Execution Support
• Monitoring
control the execution process
• Compensation
provide transactional support and undo
or mitigate unwanted effects
• Replacement
facilitate the substitution of services by
equivalent ones
• Auditing
verify that service execution occurred in
the expected way
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
24
PART II:
Semantic Web Service
Ontologies
Katia Sycara
Michael Stollberg
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
25
Contents
•
OWL-S
– Upper Ontology
– Service Profile
– Process Model
– Service Grounding
•
WSMO
– WSMO top level notions
– Choreography and Orchestration
– Mediation
•
Differences and Commonalities
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
26
OWL-S
Katia Sycara
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
27
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)
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
28
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
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
29
Service Profiles
Service Profile
– Presented by a service.
– Represents
what the service provides
– Two main uses:
1. Advertisements of Web
Services capabilities
2. Request of Web services with a
given set of capabilities
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
30
OWL-S Profile in a Nutshell
• Describes Web service
– What capabilities it provides:
• What transformation the service computes
• Type of service and products
– General features such as
• Agent providing the service
• Security requirements
• Quality guarantees of service
• Primary role: to assist discovery
– Allows capability based search
– Allows selection based on requirements of the requester
• Profile does not specify use/invocation
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
OWL-S Service Profile
Capability Description
•
•
•
•
•
Preconditions
– Set of conditions that should hold prior to service invocation
Inputs
– Set of necessary inputs that the requester should provide to invoke the
service
Outputs
– Results that the requester should expect after interaction with the service
provider is completed
Effects
– Set of statements that should hold true if the service is invoked
successfully.
Service type
– What kind of service is provided (eg selling vs distribution)
•
Product
– Product associated with the service (eg travel vs books vs auto parts)
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
31
OWL-S Service Profile
Additional Properties
• Security Parameters
– Specify the security capabilities of a Web service (eg support
X509 Encryption)
– Specify the security requirements of a Web service (eg a client
should be able to provide X509 Encryption)
• Quality rating
– What level of service quality does the Web service provide?
• Description with standard business taxonomies
– How would the service be classified in standard taxonomies such
as UNSPSC or NAICS?
This is not a closed set, new properties can be added
using existing ontologies
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
32
33
Process Model
•
Process Model
– Describes how a service
works: internal processes of
the service
– Specifies service interaction
protocol
– Specifies abstract messages:
ontological type of
information transmitted
•
Facilitates
– Web service invocation
– Composition of Web services
– Monitoring of interaction
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
34
Viewpoints of Process Model
• Three viewpoints of a Web service
– Glass Box:
• The Web service reveals all its internal structure
• Which parts of the service it performs in-house, which one it
subcontracts, etc
– Black Box:
• The Web service model does not reveal anything about the
internal working of the service
• It just specifies what data it gathers and what data it sends back
– Grey Box:
• The Web service selectively hides some parts of its Process
Model, while it publicizes others
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
35
Definition of Process
• A Process represents a transformation (function). It is
characterized by four parameters
– Inputs: the inputs that the process requires
– Preconditions: the conditions that are required for the
process to run correctly
– Outputs: the information that results from (and is
returned from) the execution of the process
– Results: a process may have different outcomes
depending on some condition
• Condition: under what condition the result occurs
• Constraints on Outputs
• Effects: real world changes resulting from the execution of the
process
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
36
Motivation for Results
• Processes may terminate in exceptional states:
– The credit company may fail to charge the credit card
– The book may be out of stock
– The deliver of the goods may fail
• Results support modeling of non-deterministic
outcomes of Web services
– The condition specifies when an outcome is generated
– Each outcome is characterized by
• a set of constraints on outputs
• a set of effects
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
37
Example of Process
<process:AtomicProcess rdf:ID="LogIn">
<process:hasInput rdf:resource="#AcctName"/>
Inputs / Outputs <process:hasInput rdf:resource="#Password"/>
<process:hasOutput rdf:resource="#Ack"/>
<process:hasPrecondition isMember(AccName)/>
Precondition
<process:hasResult>
<process:Result>
<process:inCondition>
<expr:SWRL-Condition>
correctLoginInfo(AccName,Password)
Condition
</expr:SWRL-Condition>
</process:inCondition>
<process:withOutput rdf:resource=“#Ack“>
Result
Output
<valueType rdr:resource=“#LoginAcceptMsg”>
Constraints
</process:withOutput>
<process:hasEffect>
<expr:SWRL-Condition>
loggedIn(AccName,Password)
Effect
</expr:SWRL-Condition>
</process:hasEffect>
</process:Result>
</process:hasResult>
</process:AtomicProcess>
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
38
Ontology of Processes
Process
Atomic
Invokable
bound to grounding
Simple
Provides abstraction,
encapsulation etc.
Composite
Defines a workflow
composed of process
performs
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
39
Process Model Organization
• Process Model is described as a tree structure
– Composite processes are internal nodes
– Simple and Atomic Processes are the leaves
• Simple processes represent an abstraction
– Placeholders of processes that aren’t specified
– Or that may be expressed in many different ways
• Atomic Processes correspond to the basic
actions that the Web service performs
– Hide the details of how the process is implemented
– Correspond to WSDL operations
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
40
Composite Processes
• Composite Processes specify how processes
work together to compute a complex function
• Composite processes define
1.Control Flow
Specify the temporal relations between the
executions of the different sub-processes
2.Data Flow
Specify how the data produced by one process is
transferred to another process
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
41
Example of Composite Process
Sequence
Airline
BookFlight
Control Flow Links
Flight
Specify order of
execution
Data-Flow Links
Specify transfer of data
Perform
Perform
Airline
Depart
Arrive
Get Flights
Flights
Flights
Select
Flight
Perform statements
Specify the execution of a process
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
Flight
42
Perform Construct
• Perform provides invocation mechanism
– Specify context of process execution
• input data flow
• hooks for output data flow
• Distinction between definition and
invocation of a process
– Definition specifies the process’ I/P/R
– Perform specify when the process is invoked
and with what parameters
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
43
Control Flow
• Processes can be chained to form a workflow
• OWL-S supports the following control flow constructs
– Sequence/Any-Order: represents a list of processes
that are executed in sequence or arbitrary order
– Conditionals: if-then-else statements
– Loops: while and repeat-until statements
– Multithreading and synchronization: split process in
multiple threads, and rendezvous (joint) points
– Non-deterministic choices: (arbitrarily) select one
process of a set
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
44
Data Flow
Dataflow allows information that is transferred from process
to process.
OutputInput:
The information produced by one process is transferred to another
in the same control construct
Input Input:
The information received by a composite process is transferred to
the sub-processes
OutputOutput:
The information produced by a subprocess is transferred to a
super-process
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
45
Process Model: take home lesson
• Service Model describes
– Set of processes that define the operations
performed by the Web service
– Control flow describing the temporal flow of
processes
– Data flow describing the transfer of
information between sub-processes
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
46
Service Grounding
•
•
Service Grounding
– Provides a specification of service
access information.
– Service Model + Grounding give
everything needed for using the
service
– Builds upon WSDL to define
message structure and physical
binding layer
Specifies:
– communication protocols,
transport mechanisms,
communication languages, etc.
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
47
Rationale of Service Grounding
• Provides a specification of service access
information.
• Service Model + Grounding give everything
needed for using the service
– Service description is for reasoning about the service
• Decide what information to send and what to expect
– Service Grounding is for message passing
• Generate outgoing messages, and get incoming messages
• Mapping XML Schemata to OWL concepts
• Builds upon WSDL to define message structure
and physical binding layer
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
48
Mapping OWL-S / WSDL 1.1
• Operations
correspond to
Atomic
Processes
• Input/Output
messages
correspond to
Inputs/Outputs
of processes
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
49
Example of Grounding
Airline
Sequence
BookFlight
Perform
Perform
Airline
Depart
Arrive
Flight
Get Flights Flights
Arrive
Depart Get Flights Op Flights
Airline
Flights
Select
Flight
Flight
Flights
Select
Flight op
Flight
WSDL
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
50
Result of using the Grounding
• Invocation mechanism for OWL-S
– Invocation based on WSDL
– Different types of invocation supported by WSDL can be used
with OWL-S
• Clear separation between service description and
invocation/implementation
– Service description is needed to reason about the service
• Decide how to use it
• Decide how what information to send and what to expect
– Service implementation may be based on SOAP an XSD types
– The crucial point is that the information that travels on the wires
and the information used in the ontologies is the same
• Allows any web service to be represented using OWL-S
– For example: Amazon.com
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
Handling stateful vs stateless
Web services
1. Stateless Web services
• The server does not maintain the state of the
computation
• Dataflow links specify how the client
communicate the state to the service
2. Stateful Web services
• The service does maintain the state
• No need of dataflow links since transfer of
information is opaque to the client
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
51
Representing Stateful
Web services
Client
Airline
Sequence
BookFlight
52
Flight
Perform
Perform
Airline
Get Flights Flights
Flights
Select
Flight
Flight
Arrive
Get Flights Op Flights
Flights
Select
Flight op
Flight
Server Stateless: no information is transferred between the
two operations
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
Server
Representing Stateless
Web services
Client
Airline
Sequence
BookFlight
Flight
Perform
Perform
Airline
Get Flights Flights
Arrive
Get Flights Op Flights
Server
53
Flights
Select
Flight
Flight
Select
Flight op
Flight
Stateful: information is recorded by the server, no need
of transfer between the two operations
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
54
Conclusion OWL-S section
• OWL-S provides a language for the description of Web
services
– Service Profile provides description of capabilities of
Web Service
• Allows capability-based discovery
– Process Model provides the description of how to use
a Web service
• Allows automatic invocation of Web service
– Service Grounding maps Atomic Processes into
WSDL operations
• Allows separation between description and implementation
• Supports description of arbitrary Web services
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
55
Web Service Modeling Ontology
WSMO
Michael Stollberg
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
56
Outline
• WSMO Working Groups
• Top Level Notions
– Ontologies
– Web Services
– Goals
– Mediators
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
57
WSMO Working Groups
A Conceptual Model
for SWS
A Formal Language for WSMO
A Rule-based Language for SWS
Execution Environment
for WSMO
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
58
WSMO Top Level Notions
Objectives that a client wants to
achieve by using Web Services
Provide the
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
WSMO D2, version 1.2, 13 April 2005 (W3C submission)
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
59
Non-Functional Properties
relevant, non-functional aspects for WSMO elements
• Dublin Core Metadata Set:
– complete item description
– used for resource management
• Versioning Information
– evolution support
• Quality of Service Information
– availability, stability
• Other
– Owner, financial
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
60
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
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
61
WSMO Ontologies
Objectives that a client wants to
achieve by using Web Services
Provide the
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
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
62
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:
– De-Coupling:
import / re-using ontologies, modular approach for
ontology design
heterogeneity handled by OO Mediators
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
63
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
Attributes
Relations
Functions
Instances
Axioms
set of concepts that belong to the ontology, incl.
set of attributes that belong to a concept
define interrelations between several concepts
special type of relation (unary range = return value)
set of instances that belong to the represented ontology
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
axiomatic expressions in ontology (logical statement)
64
WSMO Web Services
Objectives that a client wants to
achieve by using Web Services
Provide the
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
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
65
WSMO Web Service Description
- complete item description
- quality aspects
- Web Service Management
- Advertising of Web Service
- Support for WS Discovery
Non-functional Properties
Capability
DC + QoS + Version + financial
functional description
client-service
interaction interface
for consuming WS
- External Visible
Behavior
- Communication
Structure
- ‘Grounding’
Web Service
Implementation
(not of interest in Web
Service Description)
WS
WS
WS
realization of
functionality by
aggregating
other Web Services
- functional
decomposition
- WS composition
Choreography --- Service Interfaces --- Orchestration
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
66
Capability Specification
•
•
•
Non functional properties
Imported Ontologies
Used mediators
– OO Mediator: importing ontologies with mismatch resolution
– WG Mediator: link to a Goal wherefore service is not usable a priori
•
•
•
•
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)
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
67
Choreography & Orchestration
• VTA example:
When the service is
requested
When the service
requests
Date, Time
Date
Hotel
Hotel Service
Time
Error
Flight, Hotel
Error
Confirmation
VTA
Service
Date, Time
Flight
Flight Service
Error
• Choreography =
• Orchestration =
how to interact with the service to
consume its functionality
how service functionality is achieved
by aggregating other Web Services
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
68
Choreography Interfaces
Interface for consuming Web Service
•
•
•
•
External Visible Behavior
– those aspects of the workflow of a Web Service where Interaction is
required
– described by workflow constructs: sequence, split, loop, parallel
Communication Structure
– messages sent and received
– their order (communicative behavior for service consumption)
Grounding
– executable communication technology for interaction
– choreography related errors (e.g. input wrong, message timeout, etc.)
Formal Model
– reasoning on Web Service interfaces (service interoperability)
– semantically enabled mediation on Web Service interfaces
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
69
Orchestration Aspects
Behavior for Interaction with aggregated Web Services
Web Service Business Logic
State in Orchestration
Control Flow
1
WS
Data Flow
Service Interaction
3
2
4
WS
- decomposition of
service functionality
- other Web services
consumed via their
choreography interfaces
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
70
WSMO Web Service Interfaces
•
•
•
behavior interfaces of Web services and clients for “peer-2peer” interaction
Choreography and Orchestration as sub-concepts of
Service Interface with common description language
service interface description aspects:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
represent the dynamics of information interchange during service
consumption and interaction
support ontologies as the underlying data model
appropriate communication technology for information interchange
sound formal model / semantics of service interface specifications in
order to allow advanced reasoning on them
support higher-level process constructs for more complex
reasoning tasks
provide graphical representation for editing and maintenance
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
71
Service Interface Description
User Language (UML2 Activity Diagrams)
graphical representation for choreography &
orchestration descriptions
Downwards Translation
UML -> Formal Model
Formal Model:
“ontologized ASMs” as sound formalism
(WSMO) Ontologies as data model:
- every resource description based on ontologies
- every data element interchanged is ontology instance
Grounding:
- making service interfaces executable
- currently grounding to WSDL
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
72
Ontologized Abstract State Machines
• 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 (update)
• condition on current state, update = changes in state transition
• all GT(ω) whose condition is fulfilled fire in parallel
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
73
WSMO Goals
Objectives that a client wants to
achieve by using Web Services
Provide the
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
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
74
Goals
Client Objective Specification along with all
information needed for automated resolution
• 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 and 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
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
75
Goal-driven Architecture
Client-Side
Client
defines
Service-Side
Goal
- objective (desired final state)
- input for service usage
- goal resolution constraints,
preferences, and policies
service detection &
composition
functional
Goal Resolution Plan
- goal resolution algorithm
- decomposition (optional)
- service usage / invocation
Ontology
Ontology
service usage
Domain Knowledge
behavioral
corresponds to /
creation of
Service
Implementation
(not of interest here)
Ontology
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
Ontology
76
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 that resolve mismatches independent of content
– Mediation cannot be fully automated (integration decision)
• Levels of Mediation within Semantic Web Services (WSMF):
(1) Data Level:
mediate heterogeneous Data Sources
(2) Protocol Level: mediate heterogeneous Communication Patterns
(3) Process Level: mediate heterogeneous Business Processes
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
77
WSMO Mediators Overview
data level
mediation
terminology
representation & protocol
1 .. n
1 .. n
O
1
OO Mediator
1 ..n
G
O/G/
WS / M
GG Mediator
G
Δ-Relation
Mediation
1
WS
Δ-Relation
Mediation
1 ..n
WW Mediator
Process Level
(Communication)
1 .. n
WS
G xor WS
1 ..n
WG Mediator
Δ-Relation
Mediation
Process Level
(Cooperation)
Legend
technique used
WS xor G
Process Level
(Communication)
imports / reuses
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
correlation
78
Mediator Usage
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
79
OWL-S and WSMO
Commonalities and
Differences
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
80
OWL-S and WSMO
• OWL-S =
• WSMO =
ontology and language to describe Web services
ontology and language for core elements of
Semantic Web Service systems
Main Description Elements Correlation:
OWL-S profile
≈ WSMO capability +
non-functional properties
OWL-S Process Model
 WSMO Service Interfaces
OWL-S Grounding
 current WSMO Grounding
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
81
Mediation in OWL-S and WSMO
• OWL-S does not have an explicit notion of mediator
– Mediation is a by-product of the orchestration process
• E.g. protocol mismatches are resolved by constructing a plan that
coordinates the activity of the Web services
– …or it results from translation axioms that are available to the
Web services
• It is not the mission of OWL-S to generate these axioms
• WSMO regards mediators as key conceptual
elements
– Different kinds of mediators:
• OO Mediators for ensuring semantic interoperability
• GG, WG mediators to link Goals and Web Services
• WW Mediators to establish service interoperability
– Reusable mediators
– Mediation techniques under development
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
82
Semantic Representation
• OWL-S and WSMO adopt a similar view on the need
of ontologies and explicit semantics
but they rely on different logics
– OWL-S is based on OWL/SWRL
• OWL represent taxonomical knowledge
• SWRL provides inference rules
• FLOWS as formal model for process model
– WSMO is based on
• WSML a family of languages with a common basis for compatibility
and extensions in the direction of Description Logics and Logic
Programming
• Ontologizes Abstract State Machines and formal model for Service
Interface Descriptions
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
83
OWL vs WSML
OWL Full
WSML Full
full RDF(S) support
OWL DL
First Order Logic
WSML Rule
WSML DL
Description Logics
WSML Flight
Description Logics
Logic Programming
OWL Lite
subset
WSML Core
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
84
Summary
Discovery
What it does
Consumption &
Interaction
OWL-S
WSMO
current Web Service
technologies
Profile
Goals and Web
Services
(capability)
UDDI API
Process Model
Service Interfaces
(Choreography +
Orchestration)
BPEL4WS
Grounding+
WSDL/SOAP
Grounding
(WSDL / SOAP,
ontology-based)
WSDL/SOAP
How to consume & realize
Invocation
How to invoke
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
85
PART III:
Semantic Web Service
Techniques and Systems
Michael Stollberg
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
86
Contents
•
The “Virtual Travel Agency Example”
– Goal and Web service description
– discovery
– mediation
•
SWS tools and systems
– Web Service Execution Environment WSMX
– OWL-S Integrated Development Environment
– IRS
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
87
Challenges
•
•
Web services as loosely coupled components that shall interoperate
dynamically and automatically
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 and Interoperability
• How are data and protocol mismatches resolved?
•
Integrated systems for automated Web service usage :
– Editing and Management
– Execution Control of Functional Components
– APIs and web-based
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
88
Virtual Travel Agency Use Case
•
•
Michael is employed in DERI Austria and wants to book a flight and a hotel for the
HICSS-39 conference
the start-up company VTA provides tourism and business travel services based on
Semantic Web Service technology
=> how does the interplay of Michael, VTA, and other Web Services look like?
Contract
Flight
Booking
Service
Provider
provides
James
VTA
uses &
aggregates
Hotel
Booking
Service
Provider
Contract
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
89
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, no crappy data models” (Dieter Fensel)
(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
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
90
Trip Reservation Ontology
• defines the terminology for trips (traveling, accomodation, 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, accomodation, or complete trips
• customer, trip, price, payment
– RESERVATION REQUEST
– RESERVATION OFFER
– RESERVATION 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
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
91
Goal Description
• “book flight and hotel for the HICSS-39 for Michael”
• goal capability postcondition: get a trip reservation for this
goal _"http://www.wsmo.org/examples/goals/hicss39"
importsOntology {_"http://www.wsmo.org/ontologies/tripReservationOntology", …}
capability
postcondition
definedBy
?tripReservation memberOf tr#reservation[
customer hasValue fof#michael,
reservationItem hasValue ?tripHICSS] and
?tripHICSS memberOf tr#trip[
passenger hasValue fof#michael,
origin hasValue loc#innsbruck,
destination hasValue loc#kauai,
meansOfTransport hasValue ?flight,
accomodation hasValue ?hotel] and
?flight[airline hasValue tr#staralliance] memberOf tr#flight and
?hotel[name hasValue “Grand Hyatt Kauai Resort”] memberOf tr#hotel .
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
92
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]).
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
93
VTA Service Description
• capability description (post-state)
postcondition
definedBy
?reservation[
reservationItem hasValue ?item,
customer hasValue ?passenger,
payment hasValue ?creditcard
] memberOf tr#reservation .
assumption
definedBy
reservationPrice(?reservation, ?tripPrice) and
?finalBalance= (?initialBalance - ?ticketPrice) and
?creditCard[po#balance hasValue ?finalBalance] .
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
94
Web Service Discovery
James
has
Objective: „book a flight and a
hotel for me for the HICSS-39.“
Goal definition
searches
Service Registry
WS Discoverer
result set includes
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
VTA
95
Discovery Techniques
• different techniques available
–
–
trade-off: ease-of-provision <-> accuracy
resource descriptions & matchmaking algorithms
Key Word Matching
Possible Accuracy
Ease of provision
match natural language key words in resource descriptions
Controlled Vocabulary
ontology-based key word matching
Semantic Matchmaking
… what Semantic Web Services aim at
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
96
Matchmaking Notions & Intentions
Exact Match:
=G
= WS
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) )
X
Non Match:
G, WS, O, M ╞ ¬x. (G(x)  WS(x) )
Keller, U.; Lara, R.; Polleres, A. (Eds): WSMO Web Service Discovery. WSML Working Draft D5.1, 12 Nov 2004.
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
97
Discoverer Architecture
• Discovery as central Semantic Web Services technology
• Integrated Discoverer Architectures (under construction):
Keyword-/ Classification-based
Filtering
retrieve Service
Descriptions
Controlled Vocabulary
Filtering
Resource Repository
(UDDI or other)
Semantic
Matchmaking
invoke Web Service
usable Web Service
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
efficient narrowing
of search space
(relevant services
to be inspected)
98
Choreography Discovery
VTA
defines
provides
Goal
Requested Capability
book flight & hotel
Requested Interface
1) send request
2) select from offer
3) receive confirmation
Capability
Capability
Interface (Chor.)
1) get request
2) provide offer
3) receive selection
4) send confirmation
VTA WS
‘Trip Booking’
- both choreography interfaces given (“static”)
- correct & complete consumption of VTA
=> existence of a valid choreography?
Interface (Orch.)
1) flight request
2) hotel request
3) book flight
4) book hotel
Interface (Chor.)
1) get request
2) provide offer
3) receive selection
4) send confirmation
Flight WS
Orch.
..
Capability
Interface (Chor.)
1) get request
2) provide offer
3) receive selection
4) send confirmation
Hotel WS
Orch.
..
- VTA Orchestration & Chor. Interfaces of
aggregated WS given
=> existence of a valid choreography between
VTA and each aggregated WS?
- Choreography Discovery as a central reasoning task in Service Interfaces
- ‘choreographies’ do not have to be described, only existence determination
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
99
Choreography Discovery
internal
business logic of
Web Service
internal
business logic of
Web Service
(not of interest in Service
Interface Description)
(not of interest in Service
Interface Description)
• a valid choreography exists if:
1) Information Compatibility
• compatible vocabulary
• homogeneous ontologies
2) Communication Compatibility
• start state for interaction
• a termination state can be reached without any additional input
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
100
Communication Compatibility Example
Goal Behavior Interface
VTA Behavior Interface
ΩS1(ωØ) = {Ø}
if Ø then request
Start
ΩS1(ω1) = {request(out)}
if cnd1(offer) then changeReq
ω1(C)
ΩS1(ω2a) =
{offer(in), changeReq(out)}
ω2(C)
if cnd2(offer) then order
ω3(C)
ΩS1(ω2b) =
{offer(in), order(out)}
ω4(C)
if conf then Ø
Termination
ΩS2(ωØ) = {Ø}
if request then offer
ΩS2(ω1) =
{request(in), offer(out)}
if changeReq then offer
ΩS2(ω2a) =
{changeReq(in),offer(out)}
if order then conf
ΩS2(ω2b) =
{order(in), conf(out)}
ΩS1(ω3) = {offer(in), conf(in)}
existence of a valid Choreography
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
101
Orchestration Validation Example
VTA Web Service Orchestration
if Ø then (FWS, flightRequest)
if flightOffer
then (HWS, hotelRequest)
if selection
then (FWS, flightBookingOrder)
Flight WS Behavior Interface
Start
(VTA, FWS)
if order then confirmation
Termination
(VTA, FWS)
Start
(VTA, HWS)
Termination
if selection, flightBookingConf
then (HWS, hotelBookingOrder)
if request then offer
Hotel WS Behavior Interface
if request then offer
if order then confirmation
(VTA, HWS)
Orchestration is valid if valid choreography exists for interactions between
Orchestrator and each aggregated Web Service, done by choreography discovery
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
102
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 element, i.e. central
aspect of Semantic Web Services
– levels of mediation: data, protocol, processes
– WSMO Mediator types
• Approach: declarative, generic mismatch resolution
– classification of possible & resolvable mismatches
– mediation definition language & mediation patterns
– execution environment for mappings
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
103
Data Level (OO) Mediation
• Related Aspects / Techniques:
– Ontology Integration (Mapping, Merging, Alignment)
– Data Lifting & Lowering
– Transformation between Languages / Formalisms
• Data Level Mismatch Classification
– Conceptualization Mismatches
• same domain concepts, but different conceptualization
• different levels of abstraction
• different ontological structure
=> resolution only incl. human intervention
– Explication Mismatches
• mismatches between:
T (Term used) D (definition of concepts), C (real world concept)
=> automated resolution partially possible
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
104
Ontology Mapping Language
• Language Neutral Mapping Language
– mapping definitions on meta-layer (i.e. on generic ontological contructs)
– independent of ontology specification langauge
– “Grounding” to specific langauges for execution (WSML, OWL, F-Logic)
• Main Features:
– Mapping Document (sources, mappings, mediation service)
– direction of mapping (uni- / bidirectional)
– mapping between Ontology Constructs:
• classMapping, attributeMapping, relationMapping (between similar constructs)
• classAtrributeMapping, classRelationMapping, classInstanceMapping
• instanceMapping (explicit ontology instance transformation)
– Conditions / logical expressions for data type mismatch handling,
restriction of mapping validity, and complex mapping definitions
– Mapping operators:
• =, <, <=, >, >=, and, or, not
• inverse, symmetric, transitive, reflexive
• join, split
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
105
Mapping Language Example
Ontology O2
Ontology O1
Person
Human
- name
- age
- name
Adult
Child
1234 memberOf Person
- name =James
- age = 22
classMapping(unidirectional o2:Person o1.Adult
attributeValueCondition(o2.Person.age >= 18))
this allows to transform the instance 1234 of ontology O2 into a
valid instance of ‘adult’ in ontology O1
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
106
Protocol & Process Level Mediation
(not of interest in Service
Interface Description)
WW Mediator
internal
business logic of
Web Service
internal
business logic of
Web Service
(not of interest in Service
Interface Description)
• if a choreography does not exist, then find an
appropriate WW Mediator that
– resolves possible mismatches to establish Information
Compatibility (OO Mediator usage)
– resolves process / protocol level mismatches in to
establish Communication Compatibility
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
107
Process Mediation – Addressed Mismatches
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
108
Unsolvable Mismatches
PM
Business
Partner1
Business
Partner1
Business
Partner1
A
Business
Partner2
A
B
Business
Partner2
?
PM
B
A
?
PM
A
Ack
?
Business
Partner2
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
109
Process Mediation Example
Processes Mediator
itinerary[origin,
R
destination, date]
E
Q
time
U
E
S
price
T
origin
destination
itinerary[origin,
destination]
date
itinerary [route,
date, time, price]
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
S
E
R
V
I
C
E
110
Process Mediation Example
Processes Mediator
itinerary[origin,
R
destination, date]
E
Q
time
U
E
S
price
T
origin
destination
itinerary[origin,
destination]
date
itinerary [route,
date, time, price]
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
S
E
R
V
I
C
E
111
Process Mediation Example
Processes Mediator
itinerary[origin,
R
destination, date]
E
Q
time
U
E
S
price
T
origin
destination
itinerary[origin,
destination]
date
itinerary [route,
date, time, price]
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
S
E
R
V
I
C
E
112
Process Mediation Example
Processes Mediator
itinerary[origin,
R
destination, date]
E
Q
time
U
E
S
price
T
origin
destination
itinerary[origin,
destination]
date
itinerary [route,
date, time, price]
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
S
E
R
V
I
C
E
113
Process Mediation Example
Processes Mediator
itinerary[origin,
R
destination, date]
E
Q
time
U
E
S
price
T
origin
destination
itinerary[origin,
destination]
date
itinerary [route,
date, time, price]
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
S
E
R
V
I
C
E
114
SWS Tools and Systems
1.
OWL-S Integrated Development IDE
–
OWL-S tool suite
–
WS implementation, deployment, discovery,
invocation, and verification
2.
3.
The Web Service Execution Environment WSMX
–
Integrated Semantic Web Service system
–
WSMO reference implementation
–
The Web Service Modelling Toolkit (WSMT)
Internet Reasoning Service IRS
–
Infrastructure for Semantic Web services
–
Server acts as broker, as well as publisher
–
Client allows goal-based invocation
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
Carnegie Mellon
University
115
OWL-S IDE (CMU)
Integration of WS implementation,
deployment, discovery, invocation
and verification
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
116
Integrated WS Development cycle
• OWL-S IDE aims at automating WSDevelopment and invocation cycle
– Based on Eclipse to support WS programmers
– (Semi) Automated generation of WSDL and
OWL-S descriptions
– Consistency checking
– Automated publication with UDDI
– Integrated Semantic discovery in UDDI
– Automated generation of client code
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
117
WS Development and invocation
• Web Service Development
– Implement Web service
– Produce WSDL and OWL-S WS description
– Deploy Web service
• Advertise to available UDDI
• Make service available for invocation
• Web Service invocation on client side
– Find Web service in UDDI
– Translate internal data representation to WS data
representation
– Invoke Web service consistently with specification of OWL-S
Process Model
All descriptions should fit together
otherwise interaction with Web service fails
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
118
Overview OWL-S IDE
Integrated
OWL-S Editor integrated with Eclipse editing of
all OWL-S
modules
Publish
UDDI PortInquiry UDDI Port Capability Port
Business Registry
Green Pages
Business Description
Yellow Pages
Service Properties
White Pages
Ports and Bindins
Matching Engine
Profile
OWL-S2UDDI
Converter
Process
OWL-S API
Java Code
Generated
OWL-S
WSDL
Code
Grounding
WSDL2OWL-S
Converter
Embed guided generation of WSDL and
schematic OWL-S directly from Java exploiting
Java2WSDL and WSDL2OWL-S tools
OWL-S VM
OWL-S VM
provides an
execution
environment
for OWL-S
Web services
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
Automatic
publication,
inquiry and
capabilitybased
discovery with
Semantic UDDI
Java
Code
OWL-S API
provide easy
processing in
Java
119
OWL-S IDE Components
• WSDL2OWL-S
map WSDL descriptions into OWL-S descriptions
• OWL-S API
transform OWL-S code in an equivalent set of Java classes for
easy processing
• OWL-S Virtual Machine
control interaction with Web service consistently with Process
Model and Grounding
• OWL-S/UDDI translator
translate OWL-S Profiles in UDDI statements
• Semantic UDDI
integrate UDDI Registry and OWL reasoning to facilitate discovery
of Web services
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
120
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
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
121
Message
Message
Base
Services
Peer
Application
Services
Applications
Internet
Process Editor
Mapping Editor
Ontology Editor
Goal Editor
Management
Discovery
Process Mediation
Negotiation and
Contracting
Orchestration
Planning
Data Mediation
Communication
Choreography
Reasoner
Semantic Repository
Triple Space
Vertical Services
Message
Vertical Services
Management &
Monitoring
Developer
Internet
End User
WSMX Usage - P2P SWS Computing
Message
complete the functionality for all the boxes
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
Peer
122
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
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
123
WSMX Architecture
Service
Oriented
Architecture
s
Messaging
Application
Managemen
t
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
124
System Entry Points
storeEntity
receiveGoal
receiveMessage
Service
Provider
Service
Requester
Service
Requester
any Data
format
any Data
format
Adapter
Editor
WSML
WSML
WSML
Communication
Manager
(Requester Side
Communication
Manager
(Requester Side
Parser
Parser
Service
Repository
Adapter
Service
Repository
Legend
Matchmaker
Communication
Manager
(Requester Side)
Choreography
Engine
Data
Mediator
Parser
Communication
Manager
(Provider Side)
WSMX components
SOAP
External entities
Execution Flow
Selector
Service
Provider
Usage
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
Data
Mediator
125
Web Services Modelling Toolkit
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
126
Web Services Modelling Toolkit
• Allow description of goals,
services and mediation in WSMO
• Allows WSMO domain ontologies
to be built
• Communicates goals and service
definitions to execution
environments
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
127
WSMX @ Sourceforge.net
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
128
WSMX Wrap Up
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
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 
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
129
IRS-III:
A framework and platform for
building Semantic Web Services
Stefania Galizia and Barry Norton
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
130
The Internet Reasoning Service
is an infrastructure for
publishing, locating, executing
and composing Semantic Web
Services
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
131
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
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
132
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
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
133
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
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
134
IRS-III Framework
IRS-3 Server
+ Registry of Implementors
IRS Publisher
Java
IRS Publisher
A
Goal Specifications
Lisp
O
Web Service Specifications
S
Domain Models
IRS Publisher
+ SOAP Binding
Java WS
P
IRS Publisher
SOAP
IRS Client
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
135
IRS-III Architecture
WSMX
Browser
Publishing
Clients
Invocation
Client
J
a
v
a
A
P
I
Web Service
Publishing Platforms
Java Code
Web Application
S
O
A
P
SOAP
Browser
Handler
Publisher
Handler
SOAP
Handler
Invocation
Handler
WS Publisher
Registry
OCML
WSMO Library
IRS-III Server
LispWeb Server
OWL(-S)
OWL(-S) Handler
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
Publishing Platform
Architecture
Publishing
Clients
SOAP
SOAP
SOAP
Handler
Service
Invoker
IRS-III Server
SOAP
WS Service Registry
Service
Registrar
IRS-III Publishing Platform
HTTP Server
Web Service 1
Web Service 2
Invocation Client
Web Service 3
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
136
137
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)
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
138
IRS-III Demo
Stefania Galizia and Barry Norton
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
139
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’
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
140
Multiple WS for goal
• Each WS has a mediator for usedmediator slot of capability
– Some WS may share a mediator
• Define a kappa expression for
assumption slot of WS capability
• Kappa expression format
– (kappa (?goal) <ocml relations>)
• Getting the value of an input role
– (wsmo-role-value ?goal <role-name>)
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
141
Defining a Mediation Service
• Define a wg-mediator
• Source = goal
• Mediation-service = goal for mediation
service
• Mediation goal
– Mediation goal input roles are a subset of
goal input roles
• Define mediator and WS as normal
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
142
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
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
143
European Currency Assumption
(kappa (?goal)
(member
(wsmo-role-value
?goal
'has_source_currency)
'(euro pound)))
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
144
Goal Based Invocation
Solve Goal
Goal -> WG Mediator -> WS/Capability/Used-mediator
Invocation
Instantiate Goal Description
Web Service Discovery
Exchange-rate-goal
Has-source-currency: us-dollars
Has-target-currency: pound
European-exchange-rate-ws
Non-european-exchange-rate-ws
European-bank-exchange-rate-ws
WS -> Capability -> Assumption
expression
Mediation
Invocation
Web service selection
Mediate input values
Invoke selected
web service
European-exchange-rate
‘$’ -> us-dollar
European-exchange-rate
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
145
Hands-On Session
(with IRS III)
Barry Norton and Stefania Galizia
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
146
European Travel Scenario
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
147
European Travel Demo
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
148
IRS-III Hands On Task
• Develop an application for the European Travel scenario based on
SWS. The application should support a person booking a train ticket
between 2 European cities at a specific time and date
• Create Goal, Web service and Mediator WSMO descriptions in IRS-III
(european-travel-service-descriptions) for available services. Your
descriptions should choose a specific service depending on the start
and end locations and the type of traveller. Use the assumption slot to
do this
• Publish available lisp functions against your descriptions
• Invoke the web services
• Solution to be shown at the end of this session
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
149
Tutorial Setup
IRS Server (3000)
Domain Models
Travel
Services
(3001)
WSMX
Web Service WSMO
Descriptions
+ Registry of Implementors
IRS Lisp Publisher
Goal WSMO Descriptions
+ SOAP Binding
Mediator WSMO Descriptions
IRS-III Knowledge Model
Browser & Editor
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
150
Travel Related Knowledge Models
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
151
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
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
152
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-dateand-time, e.g. (20 33 16 15 9 2004))
– Output: booking information (string)
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
153
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
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
154
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
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
155
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."
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
156
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. "
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
157
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
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
158
Example: Goal
In IRS-III
or
In WSMT
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
159
Example: Mediator
In IRS-III
or
In WSMT
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
160
Example: Service
In IRS-III
or
In WSMT
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
161
Example: Publishing
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
162
Tips
• Order matters for input roles
– Input roles in goal must match order of arguments to function
• Need to specify both input roles and output role
• Be careful with soap binding
– sexpr as default
– String for one line output
– Use xml for multiple line output
• Input roles for web services inherited from goal
• Slot names can not be the same as class names
• Goal <-> web service linking mediator in the capability
used mediators
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
163
Closing, Outlook, References,
Acknowledgements
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
164
Tutorial Wrap-up
• The targets of the presented tutorial were to:
– understand aims & challenges within Semantic Web Services
– understand OWL-S and WSMO:
• design principles & paradigms
• ontology elements
• .. an overview of ‘hot topics’ within the Semantic Web
and Semantic Web Services
• .. OWL-S and WSMO Tools and System Presentation
• .. do-it-yourself Hands-On Session
=> you should now be able to correctly assess emerging
technologies & products for Semantic Web Services and
utilize these for your future work
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
165
OWL-S and WSMO
• North-American and European initiatives with
converging aims
• Offer a SWS platforms to be used by B2C and
B2B applications
• Provide a backbone for advanced integration and
automation of industrial and business processes
• Are the most developed SWS technologies up to
now available to be used in commercial and
industrial applications
• Developments towards refining and
interconnecting them
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
166
Future work – OWL-S
• OWL-S is close to conclusion, but a few issues
still need to be addressed
– An exception mechanism is still missing
– There is a need of an exec instruction for loading and
executing Process Models dynamically
– A new Grounding for WSDL 2 should be developed
• Additional issues that OWL-S does not address
– Security and Policies are not directly expressed in
OWL-S yet
– There are no facilities for Contracting and agreement
– There are no facilities for Web service management
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
167
Future work – OWL-S (2)
• Standardization
– The OWL-S coalition is planning to submit a W3C note to
draw attention and create momentum for W3C
standardization activities on Semantic Web services
– Members of the OWL-S coalition are already active in
standardization committee such as UDDI, WSDL 2 and WS
Coordination
• The Future of OWL-S
– OWL-S is nearing its completion and it will converge in the
results of the SWSI working group or future standardization
activities
– The OWL-S coalition plans to remain in existence to
maintain and further develop the language if needed
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
168
Future work - WSMO
• Further develop and consolidate concepts
and implementation aspects of WSMO,
WSML and WSMX
– Choreography and orchestration
– Business process execution
– Web services composition
– Process and protocol mediation
• Open to new ideas, contributions and
suggestions
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
169
Future Work WSMO (2)
• Standardization …
• WSMO & WSMX – applied in several case
studies within EU funded projects
• WSMO Studio development
• WSMX v2 to be release in November
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
170
Future Work IRS
• IRS III further integration with WSMX toolset
on-going
• IRS-III to be applied in:
– Business Processes Modelling (w/ SAP in DIP,
and new EU project SUPER)
– Geographical Information Systems (DIP project)
– Biomed Modelling (new EU project Living Human
Digital Library)
– eLearning (new EU project LUISA)
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
171
Future Work IRS (2)
• IRS orchestration and choreography to be
extended to three-level model:
– Graphical language:
– Workflow language:
UML Activity Diagrams
Cashew
• extends OWL-S
• aligns with Workflow Patterns
• expresses choreography,
as well as orchestration
– Executable language:
Ontologized
Abstract State Machines
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
172
Beyond OWL-S and WSMO
• Although OWL-S and WSMO are the main initiatives on
Semantic Web services, they are not the only activities
• Semantic Web Services Interest Group
– Interest group founded at W3C to discuss issues related to
Semantic Web Services (http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/swsig/)
• SWSI: International initiative to push toward a
standardization of SWS (http://www.swsi.org)
• WSDL-S: Semantic Annotation of WSDL interfaces
• Semantic Web services are entering standardization
– W3C working groups currently starting
– OASIS working groups currently starting
=> eventually major influence on next generation Web technology
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
173
References OWL-S
• The main repository of papers on OWL-S is at
http://www.daml.org/services/owl-s/pub-archive.html
that contains many papers produced by the coalition as
well as from the community at large
• The main source of information on OWL-S is the Web
site http://www.daml.org/services/owl-s
• The rest of this section will report what we believe to be
the most influential papers on OWL-S as well as paper
referred in this tutorial
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
174
References OWL-S
• Fundamental
David Martin, Massimo Paolucci, Sheila McIlraith, Mark Burstein, Drew McDermott,
Deborah McGuinness, Bijan Parsia, Terry Payne, Marta Sabou, Monika Solanki,
Naveen Srinivasan, Katia Sycara, "Bringing Semantics to Web Services: The
OWL-S Approach", Proceedings of the First International Workshop on Semantic
Web Services and Web Process Composition (SWSWPC 2004), July 6-9, 2004,
San Diego, California, USA.
The DAML Services Coalition (alphabetically Anupriya Ankolenkar, Mark Burstein, Jerry R.
Hobbs, Ora Lassila, David L. Martin, Drew McDermott, Sheila A. McIlraith, Srini Narayanan,
Massimo Paolucci, Terry R. Payne and Katia Sycara), "DAML-S: Web Service Description for
the Semantic Web", Proceedings of the First International Semantic Web Conference
(ISWC), Sardinia (Italy), June, 2002.
DAML Services Coalition (alphabetically A. Ankolekar, M. Burstein, J. Hobbs, O. Lassila, D.
Martin, S. McIlraith, S. Narayanan, M. Paolucci, T. Payne, K. Sycara, H. Zeng), "DAML-S:
Semantic Markup for Web Services", in Proceedings of the International Semantic Web
Working Symposium (SWWS), July 30-August 1, 2001.
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
175
References OWL-S
• 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
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
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
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
176
References OWL-S
• Composition and Invocation
Evren Sirin, Bijan Parsia, Dan Wu, James Hendler, and Dana Nau. HTN planning
for web service composition using SHOP2. In Journal of Web Semantics, To
appear, 2004
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
Massimo Paolucci, Anupriya Ankolekar, Naveen Srinivasan and Katia Sycara, "The
DAML-S Virtual Machine," In Proceedings of the Second International Semantic
Web Conference (ISWC), 2003,
Srini Narayanan and Sheila McIlraith ``Analysis and Simulation of Web Services"
Computer Networks, 42 (2003), 675-693, Elsevier Science, 2003
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
177
References OWL-S
• Formal Models and Verification
Anupriya Ankolekar, Massimo Paolucci, and Katia Sycara
Spinning the OWL-S Process Model -- Toward the Verification of the OWL-S
Process Models In Proceedings of Workshop on Semantic Web Services:
Preparing to Meet the World of Business Applications (ISWC 2004)
Narayanan, S. and McIlraith, S. ``Simulation, Verification and Automated
Composition of Web Services''. IN the Proceedings of the Eleventh International
World Wide Web Conference (WWW-11), May, 2002
Anupriya Ankolekar, Frank Huch and Katia Sycara. "Concurrent Semantics for the
Web Services Specification Language DAML-S." In Proceedings of the Fifth
International Conference on Coordination Models and Languages, York, UK, April 811, 2002.
Anupriya Ankolekar, Frank Huch, Katia Sycara. "Concurrent Execution Semantics
for DAML-S with Subtypes." In The First International Semantic Web Conference
(ISWC), 2002.
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
178
References OWL-S
• Policies and Security
Ronald Ashri, Grit Denker, Darren Marvin, Mike Surridge,Terry Payne,
Semantic Web Service Interaction Protocols: An Ontological
Approach, 3rd International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC2004),
Hiroshima, Japan
Lalana Kagal, Grit Denker, Tim Finin, Massimo Paolucci, Naveen
Srinivasan and Katia Sycara, "An Approach to Confidentiality and
Integrity for OWL-S", forthcoming in Proceedings of AAAI 2004 Spring
Symposium.
Grit Denker, Lalana Kagal, Tim Finin, Massimo Paolucci, Naveen
Srinivasan and Katia Sycara, "Security For DAML Web Services:
Annotation and Matchmaking" In Proceedings of the Second
International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC 2003), Sandial Island,
Fl, USA, October 2003, pp 335-350.
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
179
References OWL-S
• Applications
Schlenoff, C., Barbera, A., Washington, R., “Experiences in Developing an
Intelligent Ground Vehicle (IGV) Ontology in Protégé” In Proceedings of the
7th International Protege Conference, Bethesda, MD, July 6 - 8, 2004.
Aabhas V Paliwal, Nabil Adam, Christof Bornhövd, and Joachim Schaper
Semantic Discovery and Composition of Web Services for RFID
Applications in Border Control In Proceedings of Workshop on Semantic
Web Services:
Preparing to Meet the World of Business Applications (ISWC 2004)
Mithun Sheshagiri, Norman Sadeh and Fabien Gandon, Using Semantic
Web Services for Context-Aware Mobile Applications, Proceedings
of MobiSys2004 Workshop on Context Awareness, Boston, June 2004
Zhexuan Song, Yannis Labrou and Ryusuke Masuoka, "Dynamic Service
Discovery and Management in Task Computing," pp. 310 - 318,
MobiQuitous 2004, August 22-26, 2004, Boston, USA
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
180
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/
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
181
References WSMO
•
[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.
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
182
References WSMO
•
•
•
•
•
[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.
[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.
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
[Fensel, 2001] Dieter Fensel, “Ontologies: Silver Bullet for Knowledge
Management and Electronic Commerce”, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2001.
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
183
References WSMO
•
•
•
•
•
[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 (WWW2003), Budapest, Hungary.
[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.
[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.
[Stencil Group] www.stencilgroup.com/ideas_scope_200106wsdefined.html
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
184
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.
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
185
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.
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
186
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://CEURWS.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
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
187
Acknowledgements
We would like to acknowledge the contribution of the past and
present members of the OWL-S coalition for their hard work in the
development of the language. Furthermore, we would like to thank
the community at large for contributing to tools and ideas.
Furthermore, we would like to thank to all the members of the WSMO,
WSML, and WSMX working groups for their advice and input into this
tutorial.
Special thanks to Sheila McIlraith, Craig Schlenoff, Daniel Elenius
and Naveen Srinivasan for providing slides and suggestions on this
tutorial.
Slide design by Roberta Hart-Hilber, DERI Austria
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
188
Acknowledgements
The development of OWL-S has been funded almost
exclusively by the DAML DARPA program.
The WSMO working groups are funded by the European
Commission under the projects DIP, Knowledge Web,
SEKT, SWWS, and ASG; 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 TCP.
IRS development is funded by the European Commission
under the DIP project, and formerly IBROW, and by the
UK EPSRC under the AKT project, and formerly
MIAKT.
Semantic Web Services, HICSS 39, Kauai (Hawaii), 04 January 2006
Descargar

Semantic Web Services Tutorial ESWC 2005