Semantic Web Services with SOUL

  • Mladen Stanojević
  • Sanja Vraneš
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3704)


Semantic Web Services should make it easier for a user to find the needed information on Web by using natural language queries, instead of simple keywords like in search engines. It has been widely recognized that the main problem in the implementation of this idea is the problem of semantic representation, the same problem that AI researchers were trying to solve for a long time. Various ontology and schema languages are used in Semantic Web to represent the semantics of Web pages, but they require an extensive effort to translate the existing Web pages. We propose a new knowledge representation technique, so called Hierarchical Semantic Form, together with a supporting SOUL algorithm, which should provide a rudimentary understanding of existing, non-annotated Web pages, thus eliminating the need for their laborious translation. As an example we have implemented a prototype Semantic Web Service that gives information about flights stored in an ordinary Web page.


Semantic Category Grammar Rule Schema Language Successive Link Natural Language Query 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Cercone, N., Hou, L., Keselj, V., An, A., Naruedomkul, K., Hu, X.: From Computational Intelligence to Web Intelligence. Computer 35(11), 72–76 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Berners-Lee, T., Hendler, J., Lassila, O.: The Semantic Web. Scientific American 284(5), 34–43 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sowa, J.: Knowledge Representation: Logical, Philosophical, and Computational Foundations. Brooks/Cole Publishing Co, Pacific Grove (2000)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Vraneš, S., Stanojević, M.: Prolog/Rex - A Way to Extend Prolog for Better Knowledge Representation. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering 6(1), 22–37 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Karp, R., et al.: XOL: An XML-Based Ontology Exchange Language (version 0.4) (March 29, 2005),
  6. 6.
    Heflin, J., et al.: SHOE: A Knowledge Representation Language for Internet Applications. Technical Report. CS-TR-4078 (UMIACS TR-99-71), Dept. of Computer Science, University of Maryland (1999)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kent, R.: Ontology Markup LanguageVersion 0.3 (March 29, 2005),
  8. 8.
    Brickley, D., Guha, R.V. (eds.): RDF Vocabulary Description Language 1.0: RDF Schema. W3C Recommendation (March 29, 2005),
  9. 9.
    McGuinness, D., Fikes, R., Handler, J., Stein, L.: DAML+OIL: An Ontology Language for the Semantic Web. IEEE Intelligent Systems 17(5), 72–80 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    McGuinness, D., van Harmelen, F. (eds.): OWL Web Ontology Language – Overview. W3C Recommendation (March 29, 2005),
  11. 11.
    Stanojević, M., Vraneš, S.: Semantic Web with SOUL. In: Proceedings of the IADIS International Conference e-commerce 2004, Lisbon, Portugal, pp. 123–130 (2004)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mladen Stanojević
    • 1
  • Sanja Vraneš
    • 1
  1. 1.The Mihailo Pupin InstituteBelgradeSerbia and Montenegro

Personalised recommendations