Advanced Web Engineering Methologies with integration of OWL

Diksha Deo MCA, Amity Institute of Information Technology

Uttar Prades,India dikshadeo@gmail.com

Abstract— the semantic methodologies attempt to understand the meaning of data and associate data in meaningful ways. After almost a decade of vivid research, we now have a number of practical semantic applications that are in use. A few commercial semantic search systems like Powerset have been launched commercially, and specialized semantic applications are now used for travel planning, user profiling, Name Extraction, Filtering Data, Mounting Data among other functions. Ontologies are to some extent used for integrating large-scale applications and reporting data from heterogeneous systems. In this paper different ontology languages are discussed. The very important task is to find out the methods of integrating web engineering and Ontology for upgrading the solutions of real life problems and it helps to resolve the task easier and in more automated way.

Keywords— Ontologies, Mounting Data, Web flexibility

I. INTRODUCTION The monolithic amount of data on the Web and enterprise represent fundamental challenges for logic-based approach like the Semantic Web. Determining the semantic content of data is a tedious and erring process that requires deep expertise in logic and modeling. When the stipulations are at hand, severe performance consequences with ontology querying and reasoning arise. For some Ontology, like those specified in OWL, reasoning is not possible. Most of the textual data are devised in natural languages that endure from unclearness and uncertainty. Human beings can relate different terms like soft and polite if they know the context of their use. Reckoners or operating calculating machines, on the other hand, need precise and full definitions that allow them to employ the terms and interpret descriptions in which they are used.

II. WEB ENGINNERING Many web based systems call for continuous modification or refinement, and therefore Web based system development may be considered as uninterrupted, with fine granulated development, without any specific releases with software Web based organization evolution is like horticulture. Web based system will continue to evolve. It will continuously change and grow. Nevertheless, a good initial infrastructure is required to allow the growth to occur in a controlled and consistent manner, and to foster creativity, refinement and change. The garden analogy to Web-based system development and the nature of Web as a flexible

medium may make us think, or wonder, for a moment whether Web engineering approaches are appropriate for Web-based system development. I believe that they are appropriate, as they are adapted to Web environment and provide flexibility to work within a framework and allow creative development. They are not as ‘rigid’ as perceived by some based on their perception of some of the ‘traditional engineering’ approaches, and allows innovation and personalization to blossom within a framework/limited boundaries. In fact, that entire Web engineering advocate is use of effectual scientific, technology and management rationales and disciplined and systematic approaches to the productive development of high quality Web-based systems and applications. It is appropriate provided we make sure that the approaches are appropriate to the Web environment. Both the Web engineering and Web gardening metaphors are valid in Web environment, and perhaps we may need to follow what is appropriate from both the approaches.

III. TRADITIONAL IS METHOLOGIES AND WEB Research indicates that many traditional IS development methodologies are based on outmoded concepts dating back to the 1970s. These methodologies are being utilized to develop websites and, not surprisingly, they are limited since they were never intended to be used for this purpose [3]. Before moving on to put forward a methodology for web development, it is worth considering traditional IS methodologies and their applicability to this process.

IV. FUTURE RESEARCH DIRECTIONS

Textual data also tend to show inconsistencies that we can reconcile or accept in our everyday life. Humans can deal with different and inconsistent definitions of terms like tall and still use such terms in conversations and text. A computer application can in principle deduce anything—right or wrong—from an inconsistent ontology. In recent years, the challenges of unstable and evolving terminologies have become more apparent. Since semantic applications must understand the meanings of text and other data, they must update their underlying terminologies as domains change to interpret the data correctly. This is a continuous process that is costly to implement and difficult to organize. Current research on the Semantic Web is diverse and

579978-93-80544-12-0/14/$31.00 c©2014 IEEE

spans many technological disciplines. A number of unresolved theoretical questions are being addressed by the research community. For the practical use of Semantic Web technologies, a few areas carry particular significance.

A. Integration of Ontology and Rule Languages

Integrating Semantic Web ontology with logic programming and business rules has proven a challenge. According to Brachman et al. (1990), attempts to combine rules with description logics were made in the days of the classic system. Semantic Web Rule Language (SWRL) is a step in this direction. SWRL was first named OWL Rules Language before gaining built-in atoms and a more RuleML flavored syntax. In that form, it was published as a W3C member submission. The decidability of SWRL rules with the DL safety condition was established by Motik et al. in 2004 and 2005 and further elaborated by Motik (2006). [4] Another tool named Description Logic Program (DLP) inherits its semantics from OWL and may be transformed syntactically into Logic Programming syntax, thus providing a kind of basic interoperability between OWL and Logic Programming.

B. Frame based languages

Frame-based systems are based on frames or classes that represent collections of instances. Each frame has an associated collection of slots or attributes that can be filled by values or other frames. In particular, a frame may include a “kind-of” slot allowing the assertion of a frame classification. This hierarchy can then be used for inheritance of slots, allowing a sparse representation. Along with frames representing concepts, a frame-based representation may also contain instance frames that represent specific instances. Frame-based systems have been used extensively in the KR world, particularly for applications in natural language processing. The best known frame system is Ontolingua. Frames are popular because frame-based modeling is similar to object-based modeling and is intuitive for many users. The simplified syntax for the class inheritance diagram can be seen as follows: [gen .base . ANYEntity] […] Address Person Employee

In the above syntax, one can see two classes: Employee and Person. The employee class inherits from the person class and also from the address class. The following syntax gives a property of the STRING literal type that defines the city property of an address class: addressCity(Address,.STRING) [..] homeAddress(Person, Address) [..] father(Person:”child”, Person:”father”) friend(Person, Person) [..]

C. ANY supports the import of other Ontologies and also allows us to define inference rules. Web based System Development

As highlighted in the previous sections, Web engineering activities spans the entire Web life cycle from conception of an application to development and deployment, and continual refinement and update/upgrade systems. The following highlights some of the work and development in the area of Web engineering. They are however, not an extensive survey or critical review of the work reported.

1. Web Development Process Models: To help to reduce the difficulty in building Web-based systems we need a process model that describe the phases of Web-based system development - some of the aspects that make Web-system difficult include complexity, changeability, invisibility and unrealistic schedule [5]. A process model should help developers “to address the complexities of Web-based systems, minimize risks of development, deal with likeliness of change, and deliver the site quickly, while providing feedback for management as the project goes along.”[7] Further, the advancement of Web-based development should be monitorable and trackable. The process besides being easy to apply should facilitate continual update/refinement and evolution, based on feedback from users/clients. For information some of the hypermedia/Web development process models. An object-oriented model for the Web application development process, which uses XML technology to support modularity and reuse of Web document.

2. Requirement analysis and Web-based system: Design is a very important activity and calls for a systematic and disciplined approach. [5]

• Object Orientation in Web-Based Systems: Integration of Web and object technologies offer foundation for expanding the Web to a new generation of applications. According to Frank Manolo, Web must improve its data structuring capabilities, and integrate aspects of object technology with the basic infrastructure of the Web. He also argues that if the Web is to support complex enterprise applications, it must support generic capabilities similar to those provided by the OMA (Object management Architecture), but adjusted to the more open nature of the Web and to the specific requirements of Web applications. Technologies for Web object model are described and propose an object-oriented model for the Web application development process.

• Usability and User-Centered Designs: Effective Web site design requires attention to usability. Web-based systems need to be designed for easy navigation, and also they need to be attractive and useful [5]. User-centered design methods for Web sites present a User- Centric Approach to Modeling Web Information Systems.

3. Testing of Web-Based Systems: Testing, and verification and validation (V & V) of Web-based systems is an important

580 2014 International Conference on Computing for Sustainable Global Development (INDIACom)

and challenging task in the Web engineering process. And, yet very little attention is given by Web developers to testing and evaluation. Web based system testing differs from conventional software testing and poses different yet new challenges. Web-based systems need to be tested not only to check and verify whether it does what it is designed to do but also to evaluate how well it appears on (different) Web browsers. Importantly, they need to be tested for security and also for usability, from the ultimate user’s perspective. However, the unpredictability of the Internet and Web medium makes testing Web based systems difficulty. Currently, not much attention is given to Web–based system testing by developers. Also need to develop new approaches and techniques for testing and evaluation of complex Web-based systems.

D. Property Restrictions A local property restriction defines an anonymous class of all individuals that satisfy the restriction:

<owl:Restriction> <owl:onProperty> <owl:ObjectPropertyrdf:ID=”hasRoom”/> </owl:onProperty> <owl:someValuesFrom> <owl:Classrdf:ID=”Guestroom”/> </owl:someValuesFrom> </owl:Restriction>

OWL distinguishes two kinds of restrictions.

• Value Restrictions— a value restriction puts constraints on the value range of a property when applied to this particular class description. The three types of value restrictions are:

owl:allValuesFrom owl:someValuesFrom owl:hasValue

An owl:allValuesFrom restriction property links a restriction class to either a class description or a data range:

<owl:Restriction> <owl:onProperty> <owl:ObjectPropertyrdf:about=”#hasRoom”/> </owl:onProperty> <owl:allValuesFrom> <owl:Class> <owl:unionOfrdf:parseType=”Collection”> <owl:Classrdf:about=”#Guestroom”/> <owl:Classrdf:ID=”ConferenceRoom”/> </owl:unionOf> </owl:Class> </owl:allValuesFrom> </owl:Restriction>

An owl:allValuesFrom restriction is analogous to the universal (for-all) quantifier of predicate logic. Similarly, the value restriction owl:someValuesFrom is a property that links a restriction class to a class description or a data range. The owl:someValuesFrom restriction is analogous to the existential quantifier of predicate logic. Also, the

owl:hasValue restriction is a property that links a restriction class to a value V that may be an individual or data value.

• Cardinality Restrictions—OWL provides three constructs for restricting the cardinality of properties locally within a class context:

owl:maxCardinality owl:minCardinality

owl:cardinality A restriction containing an owl:maxCardinality statement describes a class of all individuals that have at most specified distinct range values (individuals or data values) for the property concerned. The following example describes a class of individuals that have at most two activities: <owl:Restriction> <owl:onPropertyrdf:resource=”#has_Activities” /> <owl:maxCardinalityrdf:datatype=”&xsd;nonNegativeInteger”> 2 </owl:maxCardinality> </owl:Restriction> A restriction containing an owl:minCardinality statement describes a class of all individuals that have at least specified distinct range values (individuals or data values) for the property concerned. The following example describes a class of individuals that have at least two activities: <owl:Restriction> <owl:onPropertyrdf:resource=”#has_Activities” /> <owl:minCardinalityrdf:datatype=”&xsd;nonNegative Integer”> </owl:minCardinality> </owl:Restriction>

V. CONCLUSIONS

Methodologies, whether used for traditional systems development or web development, have their uses and also their limitations. On the positive side they provide a useful crux for the novice developer, they act “as a comfort factor to reassure participants that ‘proper’ practices are being followed” and the project management facility provides an audit trail, that helps ensure management viability of the development progress. On the more negative side, they are often far too prescriptive and can actually constrain the developer while attempting to successfully complete a project in what is often a highly stressful and complex environment. Not surprisingly, research shows that these methodologies are rarely applied as intended as developers creatively tailor them in order to meet the needs of the particular organizational context. Thus, it would be naïve to assume that the methodology introduced here could provide some kind of universal panacea. Indeed, it is merely intended to act as a useful framework to aid the web development process.

2014 International Conference on Computing for Sustainable Global Development (INDIACom) 581

ACKNOWLEDGMENT This research paper is made possible through the help and support from everyone, including: parents, teachers, family, friends, and in essence, all sentient beings.

REFERENCES [1]. Antoniou G. and von Harmelen F. A Semantic Web Primer. The MIT

Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, London, England 2004. ISBN 0-262-01210-3.Akerkar, R. and Sajja, P.S. 2009. Knowledge-Based Systems. Sudbury, MA, Jones & Bartlett.

[2]. Bass L., Clements P. and Kazman R. Software Architecture in Practice. Addison Wesley Professional 2003. ISBN 0-321-15495-9.

[3]. Baader, F., Calvanese, D.L., McGuinness, D. et al. 2003. The Description Logic Handbook. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

[4]. Zimmermann H. OS1 Reference Model - The IS0 Model of Architecture for Open Systems Interconnection. IEEE Transactions on Communications, vol. 71 1980: pp. 1334–1340.

[5]. Bechhofer, S., Harmelen, F., Hendler, J. et al. August 18, 2003. OWL Web Ontology Language Reference. W3C Candidate Recommendation.

[6]. Kifer M., Bruijn J., Boley H. and Fensel D. A Realistic Architecture for the Semantic Web. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3791 2005: pp. 17 – 29.

582 2014 International Conference on Computing for Sustainable Global Development (INDIACom)