Information Systems Frontiers

, Volume 16, Issue 4, pp 663–696 | Cite as

Efficient adaptation of XML data using a conceptual model

Article

Abstract

One of the prominent characteristics of XML applications is their dynamic nature. Changes in user requirements cause changes in schemas used in the systems and changes in the schemas subsequently make existing documents invalid. In this work, we study two tightly coupled problems—schema evolution and document adaptation. The presented approach extends an existing conceptual model for evolution of XML applications towards document adaptation, by introducing a formal framework for detecting changes between two versions of a schema. From the detected changes it is possible to create a script that transforms documents valid against the old version of the schema to documents valid against its new version.

Keywords

XML schema evolution Document adaptation Change management Conceptual model 

References

  1. Al-Jadir, L., & El-Moukaddem, F. (2003). Once upon a time a DTD evolved into another DTD. In Object-oriented information systems (pp. 3–17). Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bouchou, B., Duarte, D., Alves, M.H.F., Laurent, D., Musicante, M.A. (2004). Schema evolution for XML: A consistency-preserving approach. In Mathematical foundations of computer science (pp. 876–888). Prague: Springer.Google Scholar
  3. Cavalieri, F. (2010). EXup: An engine for the evolution of XML schemas and associated documents. In EDBT ’10: Proc. of the 2010 EDBT/ICDT workshops (pp. 1–10). New York: ACM.Google Scholar
  4. Chawathe, S.S., & Garcia-Molina, H. (1997). Meaningful change detection in structured data. In J. Peckham (Ed.), SIGMOD conference (pp. 26–37). ACM Press.Google Scholar
  5. Clark, J., & Makoto, M. (2001). RELAX NG specification. Oasis. http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/relax-ng/spec-20011203.html. Accessed 22 Nov 2011.
  6. Cobena, G., Abiteboul, S., Marian, A. (2002). Detecting changes in XML documents. In ICDE (pp. 41–52). IEEE Computer Society.Google Scholar
  7. Coox, S.V. (2003). Axiomatization of the evolution of XML database schema. Programming and Computer Software, 29(3), 140–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dominguez, E., Lloret, J., Pérez, B., Rodríguez, Á., Rubio, Á.L., Zapata, M.A. (2011). Evolution of XML schemas and documents from stereotyped UML class models: A traceable approach. Information and Software Technology, 53, 34–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Guerrini, G., & Mesiti, M. (2009). XML schema evolution and versioning: Current approaches and future trends. In E. Pardede (Ed.), Open and novel issues in XML database applications: Future directions and advanced technologies (pp. 66–87). Idea Group Publishing.Google Scholar
  10. Guerrini, G., Mesiti, M., Sorrenti, M.A. (2007). XML schema evolution: Incremental validation and efficient document adaptation. In D. Barbosa, A. Bonifati, Z. Bellahsène, E. Hunt, R. Unland (Eds.), Database and XML technologies, Lecture notes in computer science (Vol. 4704, pp. 92–106). Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-540-75288-2_8.Google Scholar
  11. ISO (2005). Information Technology Document Schema Definition Languages (DSDL) Part 3: Rule-based Validation Schematron. ISO/IEC 19757-3.Google Scholar
  12. ISO (2008). ISO/IEC 9075-14:2008—SQL—Part 14: XML-Related Specifications (SQL/XML). http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue/catalogue_ics/catalogue_detail_ics.htm?csnumber=45499. Accessed 22 Nov 2011.
  13. Kay, M. (2007). XSL transformations (XSLT) version 2.0. W3C. http://www.w3.org/TR/xslt20/. Accessed 22 Nov 2011.
  14. Klettke, M. (2007). Conceptual XML schema evolution—The CoDEX approach for design and redesign. In Workshop proceedings datenbanksysteme in Business, Technologie und Web (BTW 2007) (pp. 53–63). Aachen, Germany.Google Scholar
  15. Klímek, J., Malý, J., Nečaský, M. (2011). eXolutio—A tool for XML data evolution. http://exolutio.com. Accessed 22 Nov 2011.
  16. Klímek, J., & Nečaský, M. (2010). Semi-automatic integration of web service interfaces. In IEEE international conference on web services (pp. 307–314).Google Scholar
  17. Kwietniewski, M., Gryz, J., Hazlewood, S., Van Run, P. (2010). Transforming XML documents as schemas evolve. Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment, 3(1–2), 1577–1580. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1920841.1921043.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lee, S., & Kim, D. (2006). X-tree diff+: Efficient change detection algorithm in XML documents. In E. Sha, S.K. Han, C.Z. Xu, M.H. Kim, L. Yang, B. Xiao (Eds.), Embedded and ubiquitous computing. Lecture notes in computer science (Vol. 4096, pp. 1037–1046). Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Leonardi, E., & Bhowmick, S.S. (2006). Xandy: A scalable change detection technique for ordered XML documents using relational databases. Data & Knowledge Engineering, 59(2), 476–507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Leonardi, E., & Bhowmick, S.S. (2007). XANADUE: A system for detecting changes to XML data in tree-unaware relational databases. In Proceedings of the 2007 ACM SIGMOD international conference on management of data, SIGMOD ’07 (pp. 1137–1140). New York: ACM.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Leonardi, E., Hoai, T.T., Bhowmick, S.S., Madria, S.K. (2007). DTD-diff: A change detection algorithm for DTDs. Data & Knowledge Engineering, 61(2), 384–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Malý, J., Mlýnková, I., Nečaský, M. (2011). On XML document transformations as schema evolves—A survey of current approaches. ISD 2010.Google Scholar
  23. Malý, J., Mlýnková, I., Nečaský, M. (2011). XML data transformations as schema evolves. In ADBIS ’11: Proc. of the 15th advances in databases and information systems. Vienna: Springer.Google Scholar
  24. Miller, J., & Mukerji, J. (2003). MDA guide version 1.0.1. Object management group. http://www.omg.org/docs/omg/03-06-01.pdf.
  25. Murata, M., Lee, D., Mani, M., Kawaguchi, K. (2005). Taxonomy of XML schema languages using formal language theory. ACM Transasctions on Internet Technology, 5(4), 660–704.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Nečaský, M., & Mlýnková, I. (2009). Exploitation of similarity and pattern matching in XML technologies. In DATESO 2009, CEUR workshop proceedings (Vol. 471, pp. 90–104). Matfyz Press.Google Scholar
  27. Nečaský, M. (2009). Conceptual modeling for XML. Dissertations in database and information systems (Vol. 99). Amsterdam: IOS Press.Google Scholar
  28. Nečaský, M. (2009). Reverse engineering of XML schemas to conceptual diagrams. In Proceedings of the 6th Asia-Pacific conference on conceptual modelling (pp. 117–128). Wellington: Australian Computer Society.Google Scholar
  29. Nečaský, M., & Mlýnková, I. (2009a). Five-level multi-application schema evolution. In DATESO ’09 (pp. 90–104).Google Scholar
  30. Nečaský, M., & Mlýnková, I. (2009b). On different perspectives of XML schema evolution. In FlexDBIST’09: Proceedings of the 5th international workshop on flexible database and information system technology. Linz: IEEE Computer Society.Google Scholar
  31. Nečaský, M., & Mlýnková, I. (2010). A framework for efficient design, maintaining, and evolution of a system of XML applications. In Proceedings of the Databases, Texts, Specifications, and Objects, DATESO ’10 (pp. 38–49). Matfyz Press.Google Scholar
  32. Nečaský, M., Klímek, J., Malý, J., Mlýnková, I. (2011a). Evolution and change management of XML-based systems. Journal of Systems and Software. doi:10.1016/j.jss.2011.09.038. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0164121211002524.Google Scholar
  33. Nečaský, M., Mlýnková, I., Klímek, J., Malý, J. (2011b). When conceptual model meets grammar: A dual approach to XML data modeling. Data & Knowledge Engineering. doi:10.1016/j.datak.2011.09.002. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169023X1100125X.Google Scholar
  34. Object Management Group (2007a). UML infrastructure specification 2.1.2. http://www.omg.org/spec/UML/2.4.1/Infrastructure/PDF/. Accessed 28 Feb 2012.
  35. Object Management Group (2007b). UML superstructure specification 2.1.2. http://www.omg.org/spec/UML/2.4.1/Superstructure/PDF/. Accessed 28 Feb 2012.
  36. Biron, P.V., & Permanente, K.A.M. (2004). XML schema part 2: Datatypes (2nd Edn.). W3C http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/. Accessed 22 Nov 2011.
  37. Polák, M. (2011). XML query adaptation. Master Thesis, Charles University in Prague, Czech Republic. http://www.ksi.mff.cuni.cz/~mlynkova/dp/Polak.pdf. Accessed 22 Nov 2011.
  38. Qeli, E., Gllavata, J., Freisleben, B. (2006). Customizable detection of changes for XML documents using XPath expressions. In D.C.A. Bulterman, D.F. Brailsford (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2006 ACM symposium on document engineering (pp. 88–90). Amsterdam: ACM Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Raghavachari, M., & Shmueli, O. (2007). Efficient revalidation of XML documents. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 19, 554–567. doi:10.1109/TKDE.2007.1004. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1263133.1263349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Rahm, E., & Bernstein, P.A.: (2001). A survey of approaches to automatic schema matching. The VLDB Journal, 10(4), 334–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Su, H., Kramer, D.K., Rundensteiner, E.A. (2002). XEM: XML evolution management. Tech. Rep. WPI-CS-TR-02-09, Computer Science Department, Worcester Polytechnnic Institute, Worcester, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
  42. Bray, T., Paoli, J., Sperberg-McQueen, C.M., Maler, E., Yergeau, F. (2008). Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.0 (5th edn.). W3C http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml/.
  43. Tan, M., & Goh, A. (2005). Keeping pace with evolving XML-based specifications. In EDBT’04 workshops (pp. 280–288). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  44. Thalheim, B. (2000). Entity-relationship modeling: Foundations of database technology. Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Thompson, H.S., Beech, D., Maloney, M., Mendelsohn, N. (2004). XML schema part 1: Structures (2nd edn.). W3C http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/.
  46. W3C (2004). Document Object Model (DOM) specification. http://www.w3.org/DOM/. Accessed 22 Nov 2011.
  47. W3C (2010a). XML Path Language (XPath) 2.0. http://www.w3.org/TR/xpath20/. Accessed 22 Nov 2011.
  48. W3C (2010b). XQuery 1.0: An XML query language. http://www.w3.org/TR/xquery/. Accessed 22 Nov 2011.
  49. W3C (2011). XQuery update facility 1.0 specification. http://www.w3.org/TR/xquery-update-10/. Accessed 22 Nov 2011.
  50. Wang, Y., DeWitt, D.J., Cai, J.Y. (2003). X-diff: An effective change detection algorithm for XML documents. In International conference on data engineering (p. 519).Google Scholar
  51. Wojnar, A., Mlýnková, I., Dokulil, J. (2010). Structural and semantic aspects of similarity of document type definitions and XML schemas. Information Sciences, 180(10), 1817–1836. Special Issue on Intelligent Distributed Information Systems.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jakub Malý
    • 1
  • Martin Nečaský
    • 1
  • Irena Mlýnková
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Software EngineeringCharles University in PraguePraha 1Czech Republic

Personalised recommendations