, Volume 15, Issue 2, pp 273–303 | Cite as

Integrating semantic web technologies and geospatial catalog services for geospatial information discovery and processing in cyberinfrastructure

  • Peng YueEmail author
  • Jianya Gong
  • Liping Di
  • Lianlian He
  • Yaxing Wei


A geospatial catalogue service provides a network-based meta-information repository and interface for advertising and discovering shared geospatial data and services. Descriptive information (i.e., metadata) for geospatial data and services is structured and organized in catalogue services. The approaches currently available for searching and using that information are often inadequate. Semantic Web technologies show promise for better discovery methods by exploiting the underlying semantics. Such development needs special attention from the Cyberinfrastructure perspective, so that the traditional focus on discovery of and access to geospatial data can be expanded to support the increased demand for processing of geospatial information and discovery of knowledge. Semantic descriptions for geospatial data, services, and geoprocessing service chains are structured, organized, and registered through extending elements in the ebXML Registry Information Model (ebRIM) of a geospatial catalogue service, which follows the interface specifications of the Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC) Catalogue Services for the Web (CSW). The process models for geoprocessing service chains, as a type of geospatial knowledge, are captured, registered, and discoverable. Semantics-enhanced discovery for geospatial data, services/service chains, and process models is described. Semantic search middleware that can support virtual data product materialization is developed for the geospatial catalogue service. The creation of such a semantics-enhanced geospatial catalogue service is important in meeting the demands for geospatial information discovery and analysis in Cyberinfrastructure.


CSW ebRIM Semantic Cyberinfrastructure Service chain Geoprocessing workflow 



We are grateful to the four anonymous reviewers, and to Dr. Barry Schlesinger for their detailed comments that helped improve the quality of the paper. This work was funded fully or partially by U.S. NGA NURI program (HM1582-04-1-2021), Project 40801153 supported by NSFC, 863 Program of China (2007AA120501, 2007AA12Z214), LIESMARS and SKLSE (Wuhan University) Special Research Funding.


  1. 1.
    Hey T, Trefethen AE (2005) Cyberinfrastructure for e-Science. Science 308(5723):817–821CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Brodaric B, Fox P, McGuinness DL (2007) Call for special issue on geoscience knowledge representation for cyberinfrastructure, Comput Geosci.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Di L (2004) GeoBrain-a web services based geospatial knowledge building system. In: Proceedings of NASA Earth Science Technology Conference 2004. June 22–24, 2004. Palo Alto, CA, USA. 8 pp. (CD-ROM).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Papazoglou MP (2003) Service-oriented computing: concepts, characteristics and directions. In: Proceedings of The Fourth International Conference on Web Information Systems Engineering (WISE 2003), Roma, Italy, pp. 3–12.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hendler J (2003) Science and the semantic web. Science 299(5606):520–521CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gruber TR (1993) A translation approach to portable ontology specification. Knowledge Acquisition 5(2):199–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fonseca FT, Egenhofer MJ, Agouris P, Camara G (2002) Using ontologies for integrated geographic information systems. Trans GIS 6(3):231–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Egenhofer M (2002) Toward the semantic geospatial web. In: The 10th ACM International Symposium on Advances in Geographic Information Systems (ACM-GIS), McLean,VA. 4 pp.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lutz M, Klien E (2006) Ontology-based retrieval of geographic information. Int J Geogr Inf Sci 20(3):233–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    W3C (2004) OWL Web Ontology Language Reference, W3C.
  11. 11.
    W3C (2004) Resource Description Framework (RDF): Concepts and Abstract Syntax. W3C Recommendation 10 February 2004.
  12. 12.
    Baader F, Nutt W (2003) Basic description logics. In: Baader F, Calvanese D, McGuinness D, Nardi D, Patel-Schneider P (eds) The description logic handbook. theory, implementation and applications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 47–100Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Martin D, Burstein M, Hobbs J et al (2004) OWL-based Web Service Ontology (OWL-S).
  14. 14.
    de Bruijn J, Bussler C, Domingue J et al (2005) Web Service Modeling Ontology (WSMO). .
  15. 15.
    Akkiraju R, Farell J, Miller JA, Nagarajan M, Sheth A, Verma K (2005) Web Service Semantics—WSDL-S WSDL-S.htm .
  16. 16.
    Farrell J, Lausen H (2006) Semantic Annotations for WSDL (SAWSDL).
  17. 17.
    Battle S, Bernstein A, Boley H et al (2005) Semantic Web Services Framework (SWSF) Overview,
  18. 18.
    ISO/TC 211 (2005) ISO19119:2005, Geographic Information—Services.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Nebert D, Whiteside A, Vretanos P (eds) (2007) OpenGIS® Catalog Services Specification, Version 2.0.2, OGC 07-006r1, Open GIS Consortium Inc. 218 pp.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Martell R (ed) (2008) CSW-ebRIM Registry Service—Part 1: ebRIM profile of CSW, Version 1.0.0, OGC 07-110r2, Open Geospatial Consortium, Inc., 57 pp.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Dogac A (ed) (2006) ebXML Registry Profile for Web Ontology Language (OWL), Version 1.5, regrep-owl-profile-v1.5-cd01, Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards (OASIS). 76 pp.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Dogac A, Kabak Y, Laleci GB, Mattocks C, Najmi F, Pollock J (2005) Enhancing ebXML registries to make them OWL aware, Distributed and Parallel Databases Journal, Springer-Verlag, July, 18(1):9–36.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Liu W, He K, Liu W (2005) Design and realization of ebXML registry classification model based on ontology. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Information Technology: Coding and Computing (ITCC’05), pp. 809–814.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Bechini A, Tomasi A, Viotto J (2008) Enabling ontology-based document classification and management in ebXML registries, In: Proceedings of the 2008 ACM symposium on Applied computing, Fortaleza, Ceara, Brazil, pp. 1145–1150.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Akkiraju R, Goodwin R, Doshi P, Roeder S (2003) A method for semantically enhancing the service discovery capabilities of UDDI. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Information Integration on the Web, Eighteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), Mexico, pp. 87–92.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    OASIS (2004) The UDDI technical white paper,
  27. 27.
    Yue P, Di L, Zhao P, Yang W, Yu G, Wei Y (2006) Semantic augmentations for geospatial catalogue service. In: Proceedings of the 2006 IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium (IGARSS06), 31 July-4 August 2006, Denver, USA. pp. 3486–3489.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Paolucci M, Kawamura T, Payne TR, Sycara K (2002) Importing the Semantic Web in UDDI. In: Proceedings of Web Services, E-Business and Semantic Web Workshop. 2002. 12 pp.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sivashanmugam K, Verma K, Sheth AP, Miller JA (2003) Adding semantics to web services standards. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Web Services (ICWS ’03). Las Vegas, Nevada 2003, USA. 7 pp.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Srinivasan N, Paolucci M, Sycara K (2004) Adding OWL-S to UDDI, implementation and throughput. In: Proceedings of First International Workshop on Semantic Web Services and Web Process Composition, San Diego, USA 2004. 12 pp.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Yue P, Di L, Yang W, Yu G, Zhao P, Gong J (2009) Semantic web services based process planning for earth science applications. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, in press, online accessible. 25 pp. DOI:  10.1080/13658810802032680.
  32. 32.
    Bermudez EL (2004) Ontomet: ontology metadata framework. Ph.D. Dissertation, Drexel University, Philadelphia, USA, 177 pp.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    OASIS (2005) ebXML Registry information model version 3.0, OASIS Standard, 2 May, 2005. regrep-rim-3.0-os, 78 pp.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Martell R (ed) (2008) CSW-ebRIM Registry Service - Part 2: Basic extension package, Version 1.0.0, OGC 07-114r2, Open Geospatial Consortium, Inc., 48 pp.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    OASIS (2007) Web services business process execution language, version 2.0. Web Services Business Process Execution Language (WSBPEL) Technical Committee(TC).264 pp.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Bowers S, Ludäscher B (2004) An ontology-driven framework for data transformation in scientific workflows. In: Rahm E (ed) Proceedings of the international workshop on data integration in the life sciences (DILS 2004), LNCS 2994. Springer, Berlin, pp 1–16Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Rodriguez MA, Egenhofer MJ (2003) Determining semantic similarity among entity classes from different ontologies. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng 15(2):442–456CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Cardoso J, Sheth A (2003) Semantic e-workflow composition. Journal of Intelligent Info-mation Systems (JIIS) 21(3):191–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Rao J, Su X (2004) A survey of automated web service composition methods. In: Proceedings of the First International Workshop on Semantic Web Services and Web Process Composition (SWSWPC 2004), San Diego, CA, USA, pp. 43–54.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Srivastava B, Koehler J (2003) Web service composition—current solutions and open problems. In: Proceedings of ICAPS 2003 Workshop on Planning for Web Services, Trento, Italy, pp. 28–35.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Peer J (2005) Web service composition as AI planning—a survey. Technical Report, University of St.Gallen, Switzerland, 63 pp.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Wei Y, Di L, Zhao B, Liao G, Chen A, Bai Y, Liu Y (2005) The design and implementation of a grid-enabled catalogue service. In: Proceedings of 25th Anniversary of IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium (IGARSS 2005), July 25–29, COEX, Seoul, Korea. pp. 4224–4227.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    ISO/TC 211 (2003) ISO19115:2003, Geographic information—Metadata.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Zhao P, Di L, Wei Y (2006) A virtual data product toolkit based on geospatial web service orchestration, Geoinformatics 2006. May 10–12, 2006. Reston, VA, USA.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Paolucci M, Kawamura T, Payne TR, Sycara K (2002) Semantic matching of web services capabilities. In: Proceedings of the First International Semantic Web Conference, Sardinia, Italy, June 9–12, 2002, Lecture Notes in Computer Science (LNCS) 2342, Springer, Berlin, Germany, 2002, pp. 333–347.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Colgrave J, Akkiraju R, Goodwin R (2004) External matching in UDDI. In: Proceedings of 2004 IEEE International Conference on Web Services, San Diego, USA, 2004. 8 pp.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Dogac A, Kabak Y, Laleci GB (2004) Enriching ebXML registries with OWL ontologies for efficient service discovery, In: Proceedings of the 14th International Workshop on Research Issues on Data Engineering: Web Services for E-Commerce and E-Government Applications (RIDE’ 04), Boston, USA, pp. 69–76.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Klien E, Einspanier U, Lutz M, Hübner S (2004) An architecture for ontology-based discovery and retrieval of geographic information. In: Proceedings of 7th Conference on Geographic Information Science (AGILE 2004), Heraklion, Greece, pp. 179–188.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Klien E, Lutz M, Kuhn W (2006) Ontology-based discovery of geographic information services—an application in disaster management. Comput Environ Urban Syst 30(1):102–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Lutz M (2007) Ontology-based descriptions for semantic discovery and composition of geoprocessing services. Geoinformatica 11(1):1–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Kolas D, Hebeler J, Dean M (2005) Geospatial semantic web: architecture of ontologies. In: Proceedings of First International Conference on GeoSpatial Semantics (GeoS 2005). Mexico City, Mexico, Springer, pp. 183–194.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Kolas D, Dean M, Hebeler J (2006) Geospatial semantic web: architecture of ontologies. In: Proceedings of 2006 IEEE Aerospace Conference. Big Sky, Montana, March 4–11, 2006. 10 pp.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Kammersell W, Dean M (2006) Conceptual search: incorporating geospatial data into semantic queries. In: Proceedings of Terra Cognita 2006, Workshop of 5th International Semantic Web Conference. November 5–9, 2006. Athens, Georgia, USA. 10 pp.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Lutz M, Kolas D (2007) Rule-based discovery in spatial data infrastructures. Transactions in GIS, special issue on the geospatial semantic web 11(3):317–336Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Maué P (2008) An extensible semantic catalogue for geospatial web services. International Journal of Spatial Data Infrastructures Research 3(2008):168–191Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Hilbring D, Usländer T (2006) Catalogue services enabling syntactical and semantic interoperability in environmental risk management architectures. Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Informatics for Environmental Protection (EnviroInfo 2006), September 6–8, 2006, Graz, Austria. pp. 39–46.Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Bai Y, Di L, Chen A, Liu Y, Wei Y (2007) Towards a geospatial catalogue federation service. Photogramm Eng Remote sensing 73(6):699–708Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Halevy AY (2001) Answering queries using views: a survey. VLDB J 10(4):270–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Russel S, Norvig P (2003) Artificial intelligence: a modern approach, 2nd edn. Prentice-Hall Inc, USA, pp 375–458Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Cyberinfrastructure Council (2007) Cyberinfrastructure Vision for 21st Century Discovery, National Science Foundation, USA, March, 2007, 64 pp.Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Foster I, Kesselman C, Tuecke S (2001) The anatomy of the grid: enabling scalable virtual organizations. International Journal Supercomputer Applications 15(3):200–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Yue P, Di L, Yang W, Yu G, Zhao P (2007) Semantics-based automatic composition of geospatial Web services chains. Comput Geosci 33(5):649–665CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Fuger S, Najmi F, Stojanovic N (eds) (2005) ebXML Registry Information Model Version 3.0, regrep-rim-3.0-os, Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards (OASIS). 78 pp.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Peng Yue
    • 1
    Email author
  • Jianya Gong
    • 1
  • Liping Di
    • 2
  • Lianlian He
    • 3
  • Yaxing Wei
    • 4
  1. 1.State Key Laboratory of Information Engineering in Surveying, Mapping and Remote SensingWuhan UniversityWuhanChina
  2. 2.Center for Spatial Information Science and Systems (CSISS)George Mason UniversityGreenbeltUSA
  3. 3.Department of MathematicsHubei University of EducationWuhanChina
  4. 4.Environmental Sciences DivisionOak Ridge National LaboratoryOak RidgeUSA

Personalised recommendations