Advertisement

Coordination, Organisation and Model-driven Approaches for Dynamic, Flexible, Robust Software and Services Engineering

  • Juan Carlos Nieves
  • Julian Padget
  • Wamberto Vasconcelos
  • Athanasios Staikopoulos
  • Owen Cliffe
  • Frank Dignum
  • Javier Vázquez-Salceda
  • Siobhán Clarke
  • Chris Reed

Abstract

Enterprise systems are increasingly composed of (and even functioning as) components in a dynamic, digital ecosystem. On the one hand, this new situation requires flexible, spontaneous and opportunistic collaboration activities to be identified and established among (electronic) business parties. On the other, it demands engineering methods that are able to integrate new functionalities and behaviours into running systems composed by active, distributed, interdependent processes. Here we present a multi-level architecture that combines organisational and coordination theories with model driven development, for the implementation, deployment and management of dynamic, flexible and robust service-oriented business applications, combined with a service layer that accommodates semantic service description, fine-grained semantic service discovery and the dynamic adaptation of services to meet changing circumstances.

Keywords

Service Description Instant Messaging Service Execution Service Component Architecture Coordination Level 
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.
    11, W.W.G.N.: Web Services Architecture. http://www.w3.org/TR/wsarch/, retrieved 20100104. (2004)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    ALIVE-project: Alive state of the art. http://www.ist-alive.eu/ (2008)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    ALIVE-project: ALIVE Methodology Document. http://www.ist-alive.eu/ (2009)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    ALIVE-project: Alive theoretical framework. http://www.ist-alive.eu/ (2009)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bell, M.: Service-Oriented Modeling (SOA): Service Analysis, Design, and Architecture. Wiley & Sons (2008). DOI 978-0-470-14111-3. 978-0-470-14111-3Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Deutsch, A., Sui, L., Vianu, V.: Specification and Verification of Data-driven Web Services. In: Proceedings of 23rd Symposium on Principles of Database System (PODS ’04), pp. 71–82. ACM Press (2004)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dignum, V.: A model for organizational interaction: based on agents, founded in logic. Ph.D. thesis, University of Utrecht (2004)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Eclipse: SOA Tools Platform Project. http://www.eclipse.org/stp/, retrieved 20091230. (2007)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fensel, D., Bussler, C.: The Web Service Modeling Framework WSMF. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications 1(2), 113–137 (2002). DOI 10.1016/S1567-4223(02)00015-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ghijsen, M., Jansweijer, W., Wielinga, B.: Towards a Framework for Agent Coordination and Reorganization, AgentCoRe. In: Coordination, Organizations, Institutions, and Norms in Agent Systems III, LNCS, vol. 4870, pp. 1–14. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Grossi, D.: Designing Invisible Hand cuffs. Formal Investigations in Institutions and Organizations for Multi-Agent Systems. Ph.D. thesis, University of Utrecht (2007)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    IBM: Business process execution language for web services version 1.1, july 2003. http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/library/specification/ws-bpel/ (Retrieved 20091120)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jaeger, M., Goldmann, G.R., Liebetruth, C., Mühl, G., Geihs, K.: Ranked Matching for Service Descriptions Using OWL-S. Kommunikation in Verteilten Systemen (KiVS) pp. 91–102 (2005). DOI \url{http://doi.acm.org/10.1007/b138861}Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    ebXML Joint Committee, O.: The Framework for eBusiness. http://www.oasisopen.org/committees/download.php/17817/ebxmljcWhitePaperwdr02en.pdf, retrieved 20091230. (2006). See also: ebXML Web Site at http://www.ebxml.org/ Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kiefer, C., Bernstein, A.: The Creation and Evaluation of iSPARQL Strategies for Matchmaking. In: 5th European Semantic Web Conference (ESWC2008), pp. 463–477 (2008). URL \url{http://data.semanticweb.org/conference/eswc/2008/paper/133} Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Klusch, M., Fries, B.: Hybrid owl-s service retrieval with owls-mx: Benefits and pitfalls. In: T.D. Noia, R. Lara, A. Polleres, I. Toma, T. Kawamura, M. Klusch, A. Bernstein, M. Paolucci, A. Leger, D.L. Martin (eds.) SMRR, CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 243. CEUR-WS.org (2007). URL \url{http://dblp.uni-trier.de/db/conf/semweb/smrr2007.html\#KluschF07} Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lesser, V., Decker, K., Wagner, T., Carver, N., Garvey, A., Horling, B., Neiman, D., Podorozhny, R., Prasad, M.N., Raja, A., Vincent, R., Xuan, P., Zhang, X.: Evolution of the GPGP/TAEMS Domain-Independent Coordination Framework. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 9(1), 87–143 (2004). URL \url{http://mas.cs.umass.edu/paper/268} CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Matskin, M.: Enabling Web Services Composition with Software Agents. In: Proc. of the Conference on Internet and Multimedia Systems, and Applications (2005)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Microsystems, S.: Jini Architectural Overview. Technical White Paper. http://www.sun.com/software/jini/whitepapers/architecture.html, retrieved 20091230. (1999)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Narayanan, S., McIlraith, S.: Verification and Automated Composition of Web Services. In: Proceedings of 11th International Conference on World Wide Web (WWW’02), pp. 77–88. ACM Press (2002)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    OASIS, C.S.: Reference Model for Service-oriented Architecture 1.0. http://www.oasisopen.org/committees/download.php/19679/soarmcs.pdf, retrieved 20091230. (2006)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Oinn, T., Addis, M., Ferris, J., Marvin, D., Senger, M., Greenwood, M., Carver, T., Glover, K., Pocock, M., Wipat, A., Li, P.: Taverna: a tool for the composition and enactment of bioinformatics workflows. Bioinformatics 20(17), 3045–3054 (2004). DOI 10.1093/bioinformatics/ bth361CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    OMG: Service oriented architecture Modeling Language (SoaML). OMG Adopted Beta Specification, ptc/2009-04-01 (2009). URL \url{http://www.omg.org/spec/SoaML/} Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    OMG: Model Driven Architecture. http://www.omg.org/mda/ (Retrieved 20091120)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Open-SOA: Service Component Architecture (SCA). version 1.00 (2007). URL \url{http://www.osoa.org/display/Main/Service+Component+Architecture+Specifications} Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Paolucci, M., Kawamura, T., Payne, T.R., Sycara, K.P.: Semantic Matching of Web Services Capabilities. In: International Semantic Web Conference, pp. 333–347 (2002)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Sycara, K., Klusch, M., Widoff, S., Lu, J.: Dynamic service matchmaking among agents in open information environments. SIGMOD Rec. 28(1), 47–53 (1999). DOI \url{http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/309844.309895}CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Sycara, K., Widoff, S., Klusch, M., Lu, J.: Larks: Dynamic Matchmaking Among Heterogeneous Software Agents in Cyberspace. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 6, 173–203 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Szomszor, M., Payne, T., Moreau, L.: Automated Syntactic Mediation for Web Service Integration. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Web Services (ICWS 2006) (2006)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Vasconcelos, W., Robertson, D., Sierra, C., Esteva, M., Sabater, J., Wooldridge.M.: Rapid Prototyping of Large Multi-Agent Systems through Logic Programming. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence 41, 135–169 (2004)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    van der Vecht, B., Dignum, F., Meyer, J.J.C., Dignum, V.: Organizations and Autonomous Agents: Bottom-up Dynamics of Coordination Mechanisms. In: In: 5th Workshop on Coordination, Organizations, Institutions, and Norms in Agent Systems (Estoril 2008)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    W3C: OWL – Web Ontology Language. http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owlfeatures-20040210/ (2004). Retrieved 20091120Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    W3C: Web Service Choreography Description Language (WS-CDL). http://www.w3.org/TR/ws-cdl-10/ (2005). Retrieved 20091120Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    W3C: Web Service Semantics – WSDL-S. http://www.w3.org/Submission/WSDL-S/ (2005)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    W3C: Semantic Annotations for WSDL (SAWSDL). http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/sawsdl/ (2007)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    W3C: OWL-S - Semantic Markup for Web Services, 2004. http://www.w3.org/Submission/OWL-S/ (Retrieved 20091120)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    (W3C), W.W.W.C.: Web Services Description Language (WSDL) 1.1. http://www.w3.org/TR/wsdl/, retrieved 20091230. (2001)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Wahli, U., Ackerman, L., Di Bari, A., Hodgkinson, G., Kesterton, A., Olson, L., Portier, B.: Building SOA Solutions Using the Rational SDP. IBM Redbooks. Vervante (2007)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    WfMC: XML Process Definition Language (XPDL). Document Number WFMC-TC-1025: Version 1.14 Document Status - Final (2005)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    WSMO: WSMO working group: Web Service Modeling Ontology, ESSI cluster. http://www.wsmo.org/ (Retrieved 20091120)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag/Wien 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Juan Carlos Nieves
    • 1
  • Julian Padget
    • 2
  • Wamberto Vasconcelos
    • 3
  • Athanasios Staikopoulos
    • 4
  • Owen Cliffe
    • 2
  • Frank Dignum
    • 5
  • Javier Vázquez-Salceda
    • 1
  • Siobhán Clarke
    • 4
  • Chris Reed
    • 6
  1. 1.Software DepartmentUniversitat Politècnica de CatalunyaBarcelonaSpain
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of BathBathUK
  3. 3.Department of Computing ScienceThe University of AberdeenAberdeenUK
  4. 4.Department of Computer ScienceTrinity College DublinDublinIreland
  5. 5.Department of InformaticsUniversity of UtrechtUtrechtNetherlands
  6. 6.Calico Jack Ltd.DundeeUK

Personalised recommendations