Advertisement

Using Process Algebra for Web Services: Early Results and Perspectives

  • Lucas Bordeaux
  • Gwen Salaün
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3324)

Abstract

Web services are computational entities distributed on the web whose goal is to cooperate in order to work out simple or complex tasks. In this paper, we advocate the use of process algebra as an abstract and formal description formalism to tackle several issues raised in the context of web services. Abstract processes are helpful to describe services at different levels of expressiveness depending on the goal at hand and to compose them in order to build more complicated services. A great interest of using process algebra is that formal reasoning is made possible at any time and for many purposes (e.g. composition correctness) thanks to the existence of state-of-the-art tools. Abstract descriptions may also be used as a first step to develop certified web services following a well-defined method. We discuss all these ideas in this paper, reinforcing them with simple examples.

Keywords

Composition Operator Parallel Composition Process Algebra BPEL Process Spin Model Checker 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Andrews, T., Curbera, F., Dholakia, H., Goland, Y., Klein, J., Leymann, F., Liu, K., Roller, D., Smith, D., Thatte, S., Trickovic, I., Weerawarana, S.: Specification: Business Process Execution Language for Web Services Version 1.1 (2003), http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/webservices/library/ws-bpel/
  2. 2.
    Berardi, D., Calvanese, D., De Giacomo, G., Lenzerini, M., Mecella, M.: Automatic Composition of E-services That Export Their Behavior. In: Orlowska, M.E., Weerawarana, S., Papazoglou, M.P., Yang, J. (eds.) ICSOC 2003. LNCS, vol. 2910, pp. 43–58. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bordeaux, L., Salaün, G., Berardi, D., Mecella, M.: When are two Web Services Compatible? In: Shan, M.-C., Dayal, U., Hsu, M. (eds.) TES 2004. LNCS, vol. 3324, pp. 15–28. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bravetti, M., Zavattaro, G. (eds.): Proc. of the 1st International Workshop on Web Services and Formal Methods (WS-FM 2004), Italy. To appear in ENTCS (2004)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Brogi, A., Canal, C., Pimentel, E., Vallecillo, A.: Formalizing Web Services Choreographies. In: Proc. of WS-FM 2004, Italy (2004) (to appear)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chirichiello, A., Salaün, G.: Developing Executable and Certified Web Services from Abstract Descriptions. SubmittedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Clarke, E.M., Grumberg, O., Peled, D.: Model Checking. MIT Press, Cambridge (2000)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Deutsch, A., Sui, L., Vianu, V.: Specification and Verification of Data-driven Web Services. In: ACM (ed.) Proc. of PODS 2004, Paris, pp. 71–82. ACM Press, New York (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Foster, H., Uchitel, S., Magee, J., Kramer, J.: Model-based Verification of Web Service Compositions. In: Proc. of ASE 2003, Canada, pp. 152–163. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (2003)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fu, X., Bultan, T., Su, J.: Analysis of Interacting BPEL Web Services. In: Proc. of WWW 2004, USA, pp. 621–630. ACM Press, New York (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fuxman, A., Liu, L., Pistore, M., Roveri, M., Mylopoulos, J.: Specifying and Analyzing Early Requirements: Some Experimental Results. In: Proc. of RE 2003, USA. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (2003)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hamadi, R., Benatallah, B.: A Petri Net-based Model for Web Service Composition. In: Schewe, K.-D., Zhou, X. (eds.) Proc. of ADC 2003. CRPIT, vol. 17, pp. 191–200. Australian Computer Society, Australia (2003)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Harrison, J.: Verification: Industrial Applications. Lecture at 2003 Marktoberdorf Summer School, USA (2003)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Holzmann, G.J.: The Spin Model Checker, Primer and Reference Manual. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2003)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hull, R., Benedikt, M., Christophides, V., Su, J.: E-Services: a Look Behind the Curtain. In: ACM (ed.) Proc. of PODS 2003, USA, pp. 1–14. ACM Press, New York (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    ISO. LOTOS: a Formal Description Technique based on the Temporal Ordering of Observational Behaviour. Technical Report 8807, International Standards Organisation (1989)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lau, D., Mylopoulos, J.: Designing Web Services with Tropos. In: Proc. of ICWS 2004, San Diego, USA, pp. 306–313. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (2004)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lazovik, A., Aiello, M., Papazoglou, M.P.: Planning and Monitoring the Execution of Web Service Requests. In: Orlowska, M.E., Weerawarana, S., Papazoglou, M.P., Yang, J. (eds.) ICSOC 2003. LNCS, vol. 2910, pp. 335–350. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Leymann, F.: Managing Business Processes via Workflow Technology. In: Tutorial at VLDB 2001, Italy (2001)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Manna, Z., Pnueli, A.: Temporal Verification of Reactive Systems – Safety. Springer, Heidelberg (1995)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mantell, K.: From UML to BPEL. IBM developerWorks report (2003)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    McIlraith, S.A., Son, T.C.: Adapting Golog for Composition of Semantic Web Services. In: Fensel, D., Giunchiglia, F., McGuinness, D., Williams, M.-A. (eds.) Proc. of KR 2002, France, pp. 482–496. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (2002)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Medjahed, B., Bouguettaya, A., Elmagarmid, A.K.: Composing Web services on the Semantic Web. The VLDB Journal 12(4), 333–351 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Meredith, G., Bjorg, S.: Contracts and Types. Communications of the ACM 46(10), 41–47 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Milner, R.: Communication and Concurrency. International Series in Computer Science. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1989)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Nakajima, S.: Model-checking Verification for Reliable Web Service. In: Proc. of OOWS 2002, satellite event of OOPSLA 2002, USA (2002)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Narayanan, S., McIlraith, S.: Analysis and Simulation of Web Services. Computer Networks 42(5), 675–693 (2003)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Parrow, J.: An Introduction to the π-Calculus. In: Handbook of Process Algebra, ch. 8, pp. 479–543. Elsevier, Amsterdam (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Salaün, G., Bordeaux, L., Schaerf, M.: Describing and Reasoning on Web Services using Process Algebra. In: Proc. of ICWS 2004, San Diego, USA, pp. 43–51. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (2004)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Salaün, G., Ferrara, A., Chirichiello, A.: Negotiation among Web Services using LOTOS/CADP. In: Zhang, L.-J., Jeckle, M. (eds.) ECOWS 2004. LNCS, vol. 3250, pp. 198–212. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    W3C. Web Services Choreography Description Language Version 1.0. Available at http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-ws-cdl-10-20040427/
  32. 32.
    W3C. Web Services Choreography Interface 1.0. Available at http://www.w3.org/TR/wsci
  33. 33.
    W3C. Web Services Choreography Requirements 1.0 (draft). Available at http://www.w3.org/TR/ws-chor-reqs

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lucas Bordeaux
    • 1
  • Gwen Salaün
    • 1
  1. 1.DISUniversità di Roma ”La Sapienza”RomaItalia

Personalised recommendations