Advertisement

Light-Weight Semantic Service Annotations Through Tagging

  • Harald Meyer
  • Mathias Weske
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4294)

Abstract

Discovering and composing services is a core functionality of a service-oriented software system. Semantic web services promise to support and (partially) automate these tasks. But creating semantic service specifications is a difficult, time-consuming, and error prone task which is typically performed by service engineers. In this paper, we present a community-based approach to the creation of semantic service specifications. Inspired by concepts from emergent semantics and folksonomies, we introduce semantic service specifications with restricted expressiveness. Instead of capturing service functionality through preconditions and effects, services are tagged with categories. An example illustrates the pragmatic nature of our approach in comparison to existing approaches.

Keywords

Service Description Service Engineer Semantic Service Service Functionality Human Resource System 
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.
    Burbeck, S.: The tao of e-business services. IBM developerWorks (2000)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Papazoglou, M.P., Georgakopoulos, D.: Service-oriented computing: Introduction. Communications of the ACM 46, 24–28 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Alonso, G., Casati, F., Kuno, H., Machiraju, V.: Web Services – Concepts, Architectures and Applications. Data-Centric Systems and Applications. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)MATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Curbera, F., Khalaf, R., Mukhi, N., Tai, S., Weerawarana, S.: The next step in web services. Communications of the ACM 46, 29–34 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Milanovic, N., Malek, M.: Current solutions for web service composition. IEEE Internet Computing 8, 51–59 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    McIlraith, S.A., Son, T.C., Zeng, H.: Semantic web services. IEEE Intelligent Systems 16, 46–53 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    OWL-S 1.0 Release (2003), http://www.daml.org/services/owl-s/1.0/
  8. 8.
  9. 9.
    Rowley, J., Farrow, J.: Organizing Knowledge: Introduction to Access to Information. Gower Publishing Limited, England (2000)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mathes, A.: Folksonomies - cooperative classification and communication through shared metadata (2004)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Aberer, K., et al.: Emergent Semantics Principles and Issues. In: Lee, Y., Li, J., Whang, K.-Y., Lee, D. (eds.) DASFAA 2004. LNCS, vol. 2973, pp. 25–38. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Golder, S., Huberman, B.A.: The structure of collaborative tagging systems. Journal of Information Science (2005)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sheth, A.P.: Changing focus on interoperability in information systems: From system, syntax, structure to semantics. In: Interoperating Geographic Information Systems, pp. 5–30. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (1998)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nagarajan, M., Verma, K., Sheth, A.P., Miller, J.A., Lathem, J.: Semantic interoperability of web services – challenges abd experiences. In: Proceedings of the 4th IEEE Intl. Conference on Web Services (2006) (to appear)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sheth, A.P., Kashyap, V.: So far (schematically) yet so near (semantically). In: Conference on Semantics of Interoperable Database Systems, pp. 283–312 (1992)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kim, W., Choi, I., Gala, S.K., Scheevel, M.: On resolving schematic heterogeneity in multidatabase systems. Distributed and Parallel Databases 1, 251–279 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Michlmayr, E.: A Case Study on Emergent Semantics in Communities. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Social Network Analysis, International Semantic Web Comference, ISWC (2005)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Mika, P.: Ontologies are us: A unified model of social networks and semantics. In: Gil, Y., Motta, E., Benjamins, V.R., Musen, M.A. (eds.) ISWC 2005. LNCS, vol. 3729, pp. 522–536. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Web Service Modeling Ontology (2005), http://wsmo.org
  20. 20.
    SAWSDL Working Group (2006), http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/sawsdl/
  21. 21.
    Keller, U., Lausen, H., Stollberg, M.: On the semantics of functional descriptions of web services. In: Sure, Y., Domingue, J. (eds.) ESWC 2006. LNCS, vol. 4011, pp. 605–619. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Harald Meyer
    • 1
  • Mathias Weske
    • 1
  1. 1.Hasso-Plattner-Institute for IT-Systems-Engineering at the University of PotsdamPotsdamGermany

Personalised recommendations