A Semantic Web Approach to the M3 Model

Chapter
Part of the Advances in Intelligent and Soft Computing book series (AINSC, volume 121)

Abstract

In the constantly expanding Semantic Web, the domain of describing offers and concepts related to them plays an important role. The use of ontologies provides a means for automated processing of knowledge, which is expressed in a standardized representation language. We argue that the M3 model can be represented in OWL, a standard ontology language. We show the benefits of such a representation. Several ontologies are shown, which can complement the descriptions made in M3 . We propose a translation of the M3 model and the M3-XML data format into an OWL-based ontology.We also show exemplary reasoning tasks, which could be accomplished with standard description logic reasoners. Some problems with using ontologies for expressing offers are also described.

Keywords

Description Logic Ontology Language Business Entity Property Chain Service Ontology 
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.
    Baader, F., Calvanese, D., McGuinness, D.L., Nardi, D., Patel-Schneider, P.F. (eds.): The description logic handbook: theory, implementation, and applications. Cambridge University Press, New York (2003)MATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Beckett, D.: RDF/XML syntax specification (revised) (2004), http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-syntax-grammar/
  3. 3.
    Connolly, D., van Harmelen, F., Horrocks, I., McGuinness, D.L., Patel-Schneider, P.F., Stein, L.A.: DAML+OIL reference description (March 2001), http://www.w3.org/TR/daml+oil-reference
  4. 4.
    Fensel, D., McGuinness, D.L., Schulten, E., Ng, W.K., Lim, E.P., Yan, G.: Ontologies and electronic commerce. IEEE Intelligent Systems 16(1), 8–14 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hepp, M.: Products and services ontologies: A methodology for deriving OWL ontologies from industrial categorization standards. Int. J. Semantic Web Inf. Syst. 2(1), 72–99 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hepp, M.: Goodrelations: An ontology for describing products and services offers on the web. In: EKAW, pp. 329–346 (2008)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Horrocks, I., Patel-Schneider, P.F., Boley, H., Tabet, S., Grosof, B., Dean, M.: SWRL: A semantic web rule language combining owl and ruleml. Tech. rep., World Wide Web Consortium (2004)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Manola, F., Miller, E.: RDF primer (2004), http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-primer/
  9. 9.
    McGuinness, D.L., van Harmelen, F.: OWL web ontology language overview (2004), http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/
  10. 10.
    Prud’hommeaux, E., Seaborne, A.: SPARQL query language for rdf (2008), http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-query/
  11. 11.
    Schmolze, J.G., Beranek, B., Inc, N.: An overview of the KL-ONE knowledge representation system. Cognitive Science 9, 171–216 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    International standard for the classification and description of products and services, http://www.eclass-online.com/

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Computer ScienceWarsaw University of TechnologyWarsawPoland
  2. 2.Institute of Control and Computation EngineeringWarsaw University of TechnologyWarsawPoland

Personalised recommendations