Advertisement

GeoInformatica

, Volume 15, Issue 1, pp 191–221 | Cite as

Functional description of geoprocessing services as conjunctive datalog queries

  • Daniel FitznerEmail author
  • Jörg Hoffmann
  • Eva Klien
Article

Abstract

Discovery of suitable web services is a crucial task in Spatial Data Infrastructures (SDI). In this work, we develop a novel approach to the discovery of geoprocessing services (WPS). Discovery requests and Web Processing Services are annotated as conjunctive queries in a logic programming (LP) language and the discovery process is based on Logic Programming query containment checking between these descriptions. Besides the types of input and output, we explicitly formalise the relation between them and hence are able to capture the functionality of a WPS more precisely. The use of Logic Programming query containment allows for effective reasoning during discovery. Furthermore, the relative simplicity of the semantic descriptions is advantageous for their creation by non-logics experts. The developed approach is applicable in the Web Service Modeling Framework (WSMF), a state-of-the-art semantic web service framework.

Keywords

Geoprocessing services Service discovery Semantic anotation Logic programming Conjunctive queries 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the SWING project, which is co-funded by the European Commission under the sixth framework programme within contract FP6-26514. It has been carried out while the authors were affiliated with the Institute for Geoinformatics at the University of Muenster (Dr. Eva Klien, Daniel Fitzner) and the Digital Enterprise Research Institute (DERI), Innsbruck (Dr. Jörg Hoffmann).

The authors would like to thank Prof. Dr. Werner Kuhn and the members of his group, the Muenster Semantic Interoperability Lab (MUSIL) for their support. Further, we want to thank Nathalie Steinmetz who provided the proof of concept for the ideas by implementing them.

References

  1. 1.
    Bernard L, Fritzke J, Wagner RM (2005) Geodateninfrastruktur—Grundlagen und Anwendungen. Heidelberg, WichmannGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Brox C, Bishr Y, Senkler K, Zens K, Kuhn W (2002) Toward a geospatial data infrastructure for Northrine-Westfalia. Comput Environ Urban Syst 26(1):19–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Open Geospatial Consortium Inc. (2009) OpenGIS web feature service (WFS) implementation specification, Version 1.1. Available at: http://www.opengeospatial.org/standards/wfs, Accessed: 28.1.2009
  4. 4.
    Keller U, Lausen H (2006) WSML deliverable D28.1 v.0.1—functional description of web services. Available at: www.wsmo.org/TR/d28/d28.1/v0.1/d28.1v0.1_20060113.pdf, Accessed 28.1.2009
  5. 5.
    Keller U, Lausen H, Stollberg M (2006) On the semantics of functional descriptions of web services. In Proceedings of the 3rd European Semantic Web Conference (ESWC2006). Budva, MontenegroGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Martin D, Burstein M, Hobbs J, Lassila O, McDermott D, McIllraith S, Narayanan S, Paolucci M, Parsia B, Payne T, Sirin E, Srinivasan N, Sycara K (2004) OWL-S: semantic markup for web services. W3C Member Submission 22 November 2004. Available at: http://www.w3.org/Submission/2004/SUBM-OWL-S-20041122/ Accessed: 28.1.2009
  7. 7.
    Gruber T (1993) A translation approach to portable ontology specifications. Knowl Acquis 5(2):199–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lutz M, Klien E (2006) Ontology-based retrieval of geographic information. Int J Geogr Inf Sci (IJGIS) 20(3):233–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lemmens R (2006) Semantic interoperability of distributed geo-services. Ph.D.-thesis at Delft University of TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Open Geospatial Consortium Inc. (2009) OpenGIS web processing service specification, Version 1.0.0. Available at: http://www.opengeospatial.org/standards/wps , Accessed 28.1.2009
  11. 11.
    Lutz M (2007) Ontology-based descriptions for semantic discovery and composition of geoprocessing services. Geoinformatica 11(1):1–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Chrisman N (1997) Exploring geographic information systems. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Zaremski AM (1996) Signature and specification matching. Technical Report CMU-CS-96-103, Carnegie Mellon Computer Science Department, Ph.D. thesisGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hoare CAR (1969) An axiomatic basis for computer programming. Commun ACM 12(10):576–580CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ullman JD (1989) Principles of database and knowledge-base systems—Volume II: the new technologies. Computer Science Press, RockvilleGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ullman JD (1996) The database approach to knowledge representation. Proceedings of the 13th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI1996). Portland, Oregon, AAAI Press, MIT Press, USAGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Chekuri C, Rajaraman A (1997) Conjunctive query containment revisited. Theoretical Computer Science—Special Issue on the 6th International Conference on Database Theory—ICDT`97 239(2):211–229Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Egenhofer M (2002) Toward the geospatial semantic web. Proceedings of the 10th ACM International Symposium on Advances in Geographic Information Science. McLean, Virginia, USAGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    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
  20. 20.
    Kuhn W (2005) Geospatial semantics: why, of what, and how? J Data Semantics III 3534:1–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    ISO/TC-211, ISO 19107:2003 Geographic Information — Spatial Schema. Available at: http://www.iso.org/iso/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=26012 Accessed: 28.1.2009
  22. 22.
    Fensel D, Lausen H, Polleres A, Stollberg M, Roman D, de Brijin J, Domingue J (2006) Enabling semantic web services. The web service modeling ontology. Springer Verlag, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Zaremski AM, Wing JM (1997) Specification matching of software components. ACM Trans Software Eng Meth 6(4):333–369CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Roman D, Lausen H, Keller U (2005) Web service modeling ontology—WSMO final draft (13 April 2005). Available at: http://www.wsmo.org/TR/d2/v1.2/20050413/ Accessed: 28.1.2009
  25. 25.
    de Bruijn J, Lausen H, Krummenbacker R, Polleres A, Predoiu L, Kifer N, Fensel D (2005) The web service modeling language WSML—final draft (5 October 2005). Available at: http://www.wsmo.org/TR/d16/d16.1/v0.21/20051005/ Accessed: 28.1.2009
  26. 26.
    Haller A,Cimpian E, Mocan A, Oren E, Bussler C (2005) WSMX—a semantic service-oriented architecture. Processdings of the IEEE International Conference on Web Services (ICWS 2005). Orlando, FloridaGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ullman JD (1997) Information integration using logical views. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Database Theory (ICDT1997). Delphi, GreeceGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hull D, Zolin E, Bovykin A, Horrocks I, Sattler U, Stevens R (2006) Deciding semantic matching of stateless services. Proceedings of the 21st National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI´2006). Boston, USAGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sycara K, Widoff S (2002) Larks: dynamic matchmaking among heterogeneous software agents in cyberspace. Auton Agent Multi-Agent Syst 5(2):173–203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Muggleton S, De Raedt L (1994) Inductive logic programming: theory and methods. J Logic Program 19(20):629–679CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Grcar, M. and E. Klien (2007) Using Term-matching algorithms for the annotation of geo-services. Proceedings of the Web Mining 2.0 Workshop in conjunction with ECML-PKDD 2007. Warsaw, PolandGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Fraunhofer Institut für Graphische DatenverarbeitungAbteilung Graphische InformationssystemeDarmstadtGermany
  2. 2.SAP ResearchKarlsruheGermany

Personalised recommendations