Declarative Representation of Programming Access to Ontologies

  • Stefan Scheglmann
  • Ansgar Scherp
  • Steffen Staab
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7295)


Using ontologies in software applications is a challenging task due to the chasm between the logics-based world of ontologies and the object-oriented world of software applications. The logics-based representation emphasizes the meaning of concepts and properties, i.e., their semantics. The modeler in the object-oriented paradigm also takes into account the pragmatics, i.e., how the classes are used, by whom, and why. To enable a comprehensive use of logics-based representations in object-oriented software systems, a seamless integration of the two paradigms is needed. However, the pragmatic issues of using logic-based knowledge in object-oriented software applications has yet not been considered sufficiently. Rather, the pragmatic issues that arise in using an ontology, e.g., which classes to instantiate in which order, remains a task to be carefully considered by the application developer. In this paper, we present a declarative representation for designing and applying programming access to ontologies. Based on this declarative representation, we have build OntoMDE, a model-driven engineering toolkit that we have applied to several example ontologies with different Characteristics.


  1. 1.
    Fowler, M.: Patterns of Enterprise Application Architecture. Addison-Wesley Longman, Amsterdam (2002)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fussell, M.L. (ed.): Foundations of Object Relational Mapping (2007),
  3. 3.
    Gangemi, A., Mika, P.: Understanding the Semantic Web through Descriptions and Situations. In: Meersman, R., Schmidt, D.C. (eds.) CoopIS 2003, DOA 2003, and ODBASE 2003. LNCS, vol. 2888, pp. 689–706. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hart, L., Emery, P.: OWL Full and UML 2.0 Compared (2004),
  5. 5.
    Ireland, C., Bowers, D., Newton, M., Waugh, K.: A classification of object-relational impedance mismatch. In: Chen, Q., Cuzzocrea, A., Hara, T., Hunt, E., Popescu, M. (eds.) DBKDA, pp. 36–43. IEEE Computer Society (2009)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kalyanpur, A., Pastor, D.J., Battle, S., Padget, J.A.: Automatic Mapping of OWL Ontologies into Java. In: SEKE (2004)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ontology Definition Metamodel. Object Modeling Group (May 2009),
  8. 8.
    Oren, E., Delbru, R., Gerke, S., Haller, A., Decker, S.: Activerdf: object-oriented semantic web programming. In: WWW. ACM (2007)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Parreiras, F.S., Saathoff, C., Walter, T., Franz, T., Staab, S.: à gogo: Automatic Generation of Ontology APIs. In: IEEE Int. Conference on Semantic Computing. IEEE Press (2009)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Parreiras, F.S., Staab, S., Winter, A.: Improving design patterns by description logics: A use case with abstract factory and strategy. In: Khne, T., Reisig, W., Steimann, F. (eds.) Modellierung. LNI, vol. 127, pp. 89–104. GI (2008)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rahmani, T., Oberle, D., Dahms, M.: An Adjustable Transformation from OWL to Ecore. In: Petriu, D.C., Rouquette, N., Haugen, Ø. (eds.) MODELS 2010, Part II. LNCS, vol. 6395, pp. 243–257. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Saathoff, C., Scheglmann, S., Schenk, S.: Winter: Mapping RDF to POJOs revisited. In: Poster and Demo Session, ESWC, Heraklion, Greece (2009)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Saathoff, C., Scherp, A.: Unlocking the Semantics of Multimedia Presentations in the Web with the Multimedia Metadata Ontology. In: WWW. ACM (2010)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Scherp, A., Franz, T., Saathoff, C., Staab, S.: F–a model of events based on the foundational ontology DOLCE+DnS Ultralight. In: K-CAP 2009. ACM, New York (2009)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ambler Scott, W.: Crossing the object-data divide (March 2000),
  16. 16.
    Ambler Scott, W.: The object-relational impedance mismatch (January 2010),
  17. 17.
    Wirfs-Brock, R., Wilkerson, B.: Object-Oriented Design: A Responsibility Driven Approach. SIGPLAN Notices (October 1989)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stefan Scheglmann
    • 1
  • Ansgar Scherp
    • 1
  • Steffen Staab
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute for Web Science and TechnologiesUniversity of Koblenz-LandauGermany

Personalised recommendations