The VLDB Journal

, Volume 12, Issue 4, pp 333–351 | Cite as

Composing Web services on the Semantic Web

  • Brahim MedjahedEmail author
  • Athman Bouguettaya
  • Ahmed K. Elmagarmid


Service composition is gaining momentum as the potential silver bullet for the envisioned Semantic Web. It purports to take the Web to unexplored efficiencies and provide a flexible approach for promoting all types of activities in tomorrow’s Web. Applications expected to heavily take advantage of Web service composition include B2B E-commerce and E-government. To date, enabling composite services has largely been an ad hoc, time-consuming, and error-prone process involving repetitive low-level programming. In this paper, we propose an ontology-based framework for the automatic composition of Web services. We present a technique to generate composite services from high-level declarative descriptions. We define formal safeguards for meaningful composition through the use of composability rules. These rules compare the syntactic and semantic features of Web services to determine whether two services are composable. We provide an implementation using an E-government application offering customized services to indigent citizens. Finally, we present an exhaustive performance experiment to assess the scalability of our approach.


Semantic Web Web services Service composition Ontology 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Baina K, Benali K, Godart C (2001) A process service model for dynamic enterprise process interconnection. In: Proceedings of the CoopIS conference, Trento, Italy, September 2001, pp 239-254Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    BEA, IBM, Microsoft (2003) Business Process Execution Language for Web Services (BPEL4WS). Scholar
  3. 3.
    Benatallah B, Dumas M, Shen M, Ngu AHH (2002) Declarative composition and peer-to-peer provisioning of dynamic Web services. In: Proceedings of the ICDE conference, San Jose, CA, February 2002, pp 297-308Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Benatallah B, Medjahed B, Bouguettaya A, Elmagarmid A, Beard J (2000) Composing and maintaining Web-based virtual enterprises. In: Proceedings of the 1st VLDB TES workshop, Cairo, Egypt, September 2000, pp 155-174Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Berners-Lee T (2001) Services and semantics: Web architecture. Scholar
  6. 6.
    Berners-Lee T, Hendler J, Lassila O (2001) The Semantic Web. Sci Am 7-15Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bussler C, Fensel D, Maedche A (2002) A conceptual architecture for Semantic Web enabled Web services. SIGMOD Rec 31(4):24-29Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cardoso J, Sheth A (2002) Semantic e-workflow composition. Technical report, LSDIS Lab, Computer Science, University of GeorgiaGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Casati F, Georgakopoulos D, Shan MC (eds) In: Proceedings of the 2nd VLDB TES workshop, Rome, September 2001. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 2193, Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New YorkGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Casati F, Ilnicki S, Jin L, Krishnamoorthy V, Shan MC (2000) Adaptive and dynamic service composition in eFlow. In: Proceedings of the CAiSE conference, Stockholm, June 2000, pp 13-31Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chakraborty D, Perich F, Avancha S, Joshi A (2001) DReggie: a smart service discovery technique for e-commerce applications. In: Proceedings of the workshop at the 20th symposium on reliable distributed systems, New Orleans, October 2001Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Chakraborty D, Perich F, Joshi A, Finin T, Yesha Y (2002) A reactive service composition architecture for pervasive computing environments. In: Proceedings of the 7th personal wireless communications conference, Singapore, October 2002, pp 53-62Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Florescu D, Grünhagen A, Kossmann D (2002) XL: an XML Programming Language for Web service specification and composition. In: Proceedings of the WWW 2002 conference, Honolulu, May 2002, pp 65-76Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gribble SD, Brewer EA, Hellerstein JM, Culler D (2000) Scalable, distributed data structures for Internet service construction. In: Proceedings of the 4th symposium on operating systems design and implementation, San Diego, CA, October 2000, pp 319-332Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Heuvel JVD, Yang J, Papazoglou MP (2001) Service representation, discovery and composition for E-marketplaces. In: Proceedings of the CoopIS conference, Trento, Italy, September 2001, pp 270-284Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Horrocks I (2002) DAML+OIL: a description logic for the Semantic Web. IEEE Data Eng Bull 25(1):4-9Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    HP (2003) NetAction. http://www.hp.comGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    IBM (2003) Web Services Flow Language (WSFL). Scholar
  19. 19.
    IBM (2003) WebSphere. Scholar
  20. 20.
    IONA (2003) Orbix E2A. http://www.iona.comGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lazcano A, Alonso G, Schuldt H, Schuler C (2000) The WISE approach to electronic commerce. Int J Comput Sys Sci Eng 15(5):343-355Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Li L, Horrocks I (2003) A software framework for matchmaking based on Semantic Web technology. In: Proceedings of the WWW 2003 conference, Budapest, May 2003, pp 331-339Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    McIlraith SA, Son TC, Zeng H (2001) Semantic Web services. IEEE Intell Sys 16(2):46-53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mecella M, Pernici B, Craca P (2001) Compatibility of e-services in a cooperative multi-platform environment. In: Proceedings of the 2nd VLDB TES workshop, Rome, September 2001, pp 44-57Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Medjahed B, Benatallah B, Bouguettaya A, Ngu A, Elmagarmid A (2003) Business-to-business interactions: issues and enabling technologies. VLDB J 12(1):59-85Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Medjahed B, Rezgui A, Bouguettaya A, Ouzzani M (2003) Infrastructure for e-government Web services. IEEE Internet Comput 7(1):58-65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Microsoft (2002) .NET. Scholar
  28. 28.
    Microsoft (2003) Web Services for Business Process Design (XLANG). Scholar
  29. 29.
    Muth P, Wodtke D, Weissenfels J, Dittrich AK, Weikum G (1998) From centralized workflow specification to distributed workflow execution. J Intell Inform Sys 10(2):159-184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Paolucci M, Kawamura T, Payne TR, Sycara K (2002) Semantic matching of Web services capabilities. In: Proceedings of the 1st international Semantic Web conference, Sardinia, Italy, June 2002, pp 318-332Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Payne TR, Paolucci M, Sycara K (2001) Advertising and matching DAML-S service descriptions. In: Proceedings of the international Semantic Web working symposium, Stanford, CA, July 2001Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Ponnekanti SR, Fox A (2002) SWORD: A developer toolkit for Web service composition. In: Proceedings of the WWW 2002 conference, Honolulu, May 2002Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Rezgui A, Ouzzani M, Bouguettaya A, Medjahed B (2002) Preserving privacy in Web services. In: Proceedings of the the 4th international ACM workshop on Web information and data management, McLean, VA, November 2002, pp 56-62Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Schuster H, Georgakopoulos D, Cichocki A, Baker D (2000) Modeling and composing service-based and reference process-based multi-enterprise processes. In: Proceedings of the CAiSE conference, Stockholm, June 2000, pp 247-263Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Sheth A, Miller J (2003) Web services: technical evolution yet practical revolution. IEEE Intell Sys 18(1):78-80Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Sun (2003) Sun ONE. http://wwws.sun.comGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Sycara K, Klush M, Widoff S (1999) Dynamic service matchmaking among agents in open information environments. ACM SIGMOD Rec 28(1):47-53Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Tsur S, Abiteboul S, Agrawal R, Dayal U, Klein J, Weikum G (2001) Are Web services the next revolution in e-commerce? (Panel). In: Proceedings of the VLDB conference, Rome, September 2001, pp 614-617Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Van der Aalst W Don’t go with the flow: Web services composition standards exposed. IEEE Intell Sys 18(1):72-76Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Vaughan-Nichols SJ (2002) Web services: beyond the hype. IEEE Comput 35(2):18-21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    W3C (2001) XML Schema. Scholar
  42. 42.
    W3C (2003) OWL Web Ontology Language overview. Scholar
  43. 43.
    W3C (2003) Semantic Web. Scholar
  44. 44.
    W3C (2003) Simple Object Access Protocol (SOAP). Scholar
  45. 45.
    W3C (2003) Universal description, discovery, and integration (UDDI). http://www.uddi.orgGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    W3C (2003) Web Services Description Language (WSDL). Scholar
  47. 47.
    WebMethods (2003) http://www.webmethods.comGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Weikum G (ed) (2002) Special issue on organizing and discovering the Semantic Web. IEEE Data Eng Bull 25(1): 1-58Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin/Heidelberg 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Brahim Medjahed
    • 1
    Email author
  • Athman Bouguettaya
    • 1
  • Ahmed K. Elmagarmid
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceVirginia TechFalls ChurchUSA
  2. 2.Department of Computer SciencesPurdue UniversityWest LafayetteUSA

Personalised recommendations