An Experimental Assessment of An Experimental Assessment of Semantic Web-based Integration Support Semantic Web-based Integration Support

- - Industrial Interoperability Focus -Industrial Interoperability Focus -

Nenad Anicic, Nenad Ivezic, Serm KulvatunyouNenad Anicic, Nenad Ivezic, Serm KulvatunyouNational Institute of Standards and TechnologyNational Institute of Standards and Technology

OutlineOutline

MotivationMotivation

ObjectivesObjectives

XML Schema-based integrationXML Schema-based integration

OWL DL-based integrationOWL DL-based integration

Expected ContributionsExpected Contributions

IssuesIssues

MotivationMotivation

Content standards are hard to implement for application-level Content standards are hard to implement for application-level interoperability because of :interoperability because of :

the lack of explicit application-level semantics in these standards the lack of explicit application-level semantics in these standards

the very flexible, syntax-level specifications used in the standardsthe very flexible, syntax-level specifications used in the standards

The consequences are :The consequences are :

Costly and effort-intensive translation process among the Costly and effort-intensive translation process among the independently implemented content standardsindependently implemented content standards

Hard to test vendor products for application-level interoperability.Hard to test vendor products for application-level interoperability.

ObjectivesObjectives

Assess usability of OWL to support industry Assess usability of OWL to support industry interoperability effortsinteroperability efforts

Develop an experimental toolset that will enable Develop an experimental toolset that will enable formalization of current content standardsformalization of current content standards

Demonstrate potential positive effects of this Demonstrate potential positive effects of this formalization on a series of interoperability problems formalization on a series of interoperability problems from on-going industrial efforts.from on-going industrial efforts.

Help design, re-use, and distribution of XML Help design, re-use, and distribution of XML Schema business documentSchema business document

The general application integration situation The general application integration situation and target integration capabilityand target integration capability

OAGXML Schema

STARXML Schema

AIAGXML Schema

translationtranslation

STAR XML data

AIAG XML data

STARXML data

AIAGXML data

AIAGOWL DL

STAROWL DL

OAGOWL DL

DL Reasoner

XSLT Mapping

OWL-based integration approach – OWL-based integration approach – expected contributions expected contributions

Procedure and Tools for Procedure and Tools for

Model-based Equivalence Test of Schema Model-based Equivalence Test of Schema DocumentsDocuments

Validating XML data using OWL-DL reasonerValidating XML data using OWL-DL reasoner

Semantic equivalence tests between source Semantic equivalence tests between source and target XML instancesand target XML instances

Model-based EquivalenceModel-based Equivalence of Schema Documents of Schema Documents

Create a merged ontology from Create a merged ontology from independently developed STAR and AIAG independently developed STAR and AIAG ontologiesontologies

Check for any inconsistencies in the merged Check for any inconsistencies in the merged ontologiesontologies

Identify similarity between two schemas Identify similarity between two schemas based on the comparison of their respective based on the comparison of their respective semantic viewssemantic views

We assume that a high degree of We assume that a high degree of equivalence may be obtained assuming equivalence may be obtained assuming common usage of core components as is the common usage of core components as is the case of OAG standardcase of OAG standard

XML SchemaSTAR

XML SchemaAIAG

OWL DLSTAR

OWL DLAIAG

Equivalent to ?

Close to?

Translation Tools

Validating XML data using OWL-DL Validating XML data using OWL-DL reasonerreasoner

Validate the XML data with respect to Validate the XML data with respect to the XML Schemathe XML Schema

Translate XML data to OWL instanceTranslate XML data to OWL instance

Validate the OWL individual with Validate the OWL individual with respect to the ontologyrespect to the ontology

XML Schema

OWL DL

Conforms to ?

Translation Tools

XMLInstance

OWL DLSTAR

OWLInstance

XML-to-OWL Translation ProcedureXML-to-OWL Translation Procedure

DLReasoner

DIG interface

OAG XML-to-OWL Translation tool

XML Schema

XML Schema instances Othersinterfaces

XSLT

XSLT

TBOX

ABOX

AIAG

STAR

OWL DLOAG

TBOX

Semantic Equivalence test Semantic Equivalence test between two XML instancesbetween two XML instances

Validate the XML data with Validate the XML data with respect to the OWLrespect to the OWL

Add set of assertion to check Add set of assertion to check equivalenceequivalence

XML SchemaSTAR

XML SchemaAIAG

Translation Tools

XMLInstance

STAR

XMLInstance

AIAG

OWL DLSTAR

STAROWL

Instance

OWL DLSTAR

AIAGOWL

Instance

?=

STAR

OWL DLOAG

AIAG

Mapping Definitions Issues Mapping Definitions Issues

KEY ISSUE: choose optimal OWL constructs that will be KEY ISSUE: choose optimal OWL constructs that will be suitable for future reasoning about the original XML suitable for future reasoning about the original XML schema and in support of interoperability.schema and in support of interoperability.

What are the necessary and sufficient conditions for identifying What are the necessary and sufficient conditions for identifying an XML BOD component in an OWL model? Can we extract that an XML BOD component in an OWL model? Can we extract that information from XML Schema? information from XML Schema?

OAG Resources (i.e., fundamental data elements) define OAG Resources (i.e., fundamental data elements) define semantically different / similar concepts. semantically different / similar concepts.

How does one uniquely identify every OAG OWL concept? How does one uniquely identify every OAG OWL concept?

How to define constraints which are defined as simpleType How to define constraints which are defined as simpleType definitiondefinition

Relevant publicationsRelevant publications[1] D.Trastour, C.Preist , and D.Coleman,[1] D.Trastour, C.Preist , and D.Coleman, “Using Semantic Web Technology to Enhance “Using Semantic Web Technology to Enhance

Current Business-to-Business Integration Approaches”Current Business-to-Business Integration Approaches”. 7th IEEE International Enterprise . 7th IEEE International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference, EDOC 2003, Brisbane, Australia, Sept 16-Distributed Object Computing Conference, EDOC 2003, Brisbane, Australia, Sept 16-19th , 200319th , 2003

[2] P.Lehti and P.Fankhauser:[2] P.Lehti and P.Fankhauser: XML data integration with OWL: experiences and challenges. XML data integration with OWL: experiences and challenges. Applications and the Internet, 2004. Proceedings. 2004 International Symposium, 26-30 Applications and the Internet, 2004. Proceedings. 2004 International Symposium, 26-30 Jan. 2004 Pages:160 – 167Jan. 2004 Pages:160 – 167

[3] V. Haarslev and R. M¨oller. Description of the RACER system and its applications. In [3] V. Haarslev and R. M¨oller. Description of the RACER system and its applications. In Proceedings InternationalWorkshop on Description Logics (DL-2001)Proceedings InternationalWorkshop on Description Logics (DL-2001), 2001., 2001.

[4] Web Ontology Language (OWL) Reference Version 1.0,- [4] Web Ontology Language (OWL) Reference Version 1.0,- http://www.daml.org/2002/06/webont/owl-ref-proposedhttp://www.daml.org/2002/06/webont/owl-ref-proposed

[5] Jena2 Semantic Web Toolkit: [5] Jena2 Semantic Web Toolkit: http://www.hpl.hp.com/semweb/jena2.htmhttp://www.hpl.hp.com/semweb/jena2.htm..

[6] A. Boukottaya, C. Vanoirbeek, F. Paganelli, O. Abou Khaled[6] A. Boukottaya, C. Vanoirbeek, F. Paganelli, O. Abou Khaled “Automating XML document “Automating XML document Transformations: A conceptual modelling based approach”Transformations: A conceptual modelling based approach” The First Asia-Pacific The First Asia-Pacific Conference on Conceptual Modelling, Dunedin, New Zealand, January 18 -- 22, 2004 Conference on Conceptual Modelling, Dunedin, New Zealand, January 18 -- 22, 2004

[7] M.Klein1, D.Fensel1, F.Harmelen, and I.Horrocks “[7] M.Klein1, D.Fensel1, F.Harmelen, and I.Horrocks “The relation between ontologies and The relation between ontologies and XML schemasXML schemas” Linkoping Electronic Articles in Computer and Information Science Vol. ” Linkoping Electronic Articles in Computer and Information Science Vol. 6(2001)6(2001)