The ATHENA Interoperability Framework

  • A. -J. Berre
  • B Elvesæter
  • N. Figay
  • C. Guglielmina
  • S. G. Johnsen
  • D. Karlsen
  • T. Knothe
  • S. Lippe


In this paper we present results from the ATHENA Integrated Project in defining the ATHENA Interoperability Framework (AIF) for enterprise applications and software systems. The AIF provides a compound framework and associated reference architecture for capturing the research elements and solutions to interoperability issues that address the problem in a holistic way. The AIF also provides an associated methodological framework which describes the approach towards interoperability from the decision to evaluate collaboration until solution maintenance, and the reference guidelines for the adoption of the reference architecture.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

6 References

  1. [1]
    IEEE, “IEEE Standard Computer Dictionary: A Compilation of IEEE Standard Computer Glossaries”, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, 1990.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    ATHENA, “ATHENA Public Web Site”, ATHENA Integrated Project, 2006. Scholar
  3. [3]
    ATHENA, “D.A4.2: Specification of Interoperability Framework and Profiles, Guidelines and Best Practices”, ATHENA Integrated Project, Deliverable D.A4.2, Work in progress, Final public version to be published in March 2007.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    IDEAS, “A Gap Analysis-Required Activities in Research, Technology and Standardisation to close the RTS Gap-Roadmaps and Recommendations on RTS activities”, IDEAS, Deliverables D.3.4-D.3.5-D3.6, 2003.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    IEEE, “IEEE Std 1471-2000: IEEE Recommended Practice for Architectural Description of Software-Intensive Systems”, IEEE, October 2000.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    B. Elvesæter, A. Hahn, A.-J. Berre, and T. Neple, “Towards an Interoperability Framework for Model-Driven Development of Software Systems”, in Proc. of the 1st International Conference on Interoperability of Enterprise Software and Applications (INTEROP-ESA 2005), Geneva, Switzerland, 2005.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    INTEROP, “INTEROP Home Page”, INTEROP NoE, 2005. Scholar
  8. [8]
    ATHENA, “D.A1.3.1: Report on Methodology description and guidelines definition, Version 1.0”, ATHENA Integrated Project, Deliverable D.A1.3.1, March 2005.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    ATHENA, “D.A2.2: Specification of a Cross-Organisational Business Process Model, Version 1.0”, ATHENA IP, Deliverable D.A2.2, June 2005.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    ATHENA, “D.A6.4: Model-driven and Adaptable Interoperability Infrastructure, Version 1.0”, ATHENA Integrated Project, Deliverable D.A6.4, January 2006.Google Scholar
  11. [11], “Platform-independent model for service-oriented architecture (PIM4SOA)”, The PIM4SOA project, 2006. Scholar
  12. [12]
    ATHENA, “D.A3.1: SoA on Ontologies and the Ontology Authoring and Management System, with Ontology Modelling Language, Version 1.0”, ATHENA Integrated Project, Deliverable D.A3.1, March 2005.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    W3C, “XML Schema Part 0: Primer Second Edition”, World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), W3C Recommendation, 28 October 2004. Scholar
  14. [14]
    EUP, “Enterprise Unified Process (EUP) Home Page”, Enterprise Unified Process, 2006. Scholar
  15. [15]
    I. Jacobson, G. Booch, and J. Rumbaugh, “The Unified Software Development Process”, Addison-Wesley Longman, 1999, ISBN: 0-20-157-169-2.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    J. Vayssière, G. Benguria, B. Elvesæter, K. Fischer, and I. Zinnikus, “Rapid Prototyping for Service-Oriented Architectures”, in Proc. of the 2nd Workshop on Web Services Interoperability (WSI 2006), Bordeaux, France, 2006.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. -J. Berre
    • 1
  • B Elvesæter
    • 1
  • N. Figay
    • 2
  • C. Guglielmina
    • 3
  • S. G. Johnsen
    • 1
  • D. Karlsen
    • 4
  • T. Knothe
    • 5
  • S. Lippe
    • 6
  1. 1.SINTEF ICTBlindernNorway
  2. 2.EADS CCRSuresnes CedexFrance
  3. 3.TXT e-solutionsGenovaItaly
  4. 4.AKMLysakerNorway
  5. 5.FhG IPKBerlinGermany
  6. 6.Pty Ltd. Level 12SAP ResearchSt. BrisbaneAustralia

Personalised recommendations