Ontology Evolution

State of the Art and Future Directions
  • Pieter De Leenheer
  • Tom Mens
Part of the Computing for Human Experience book series (ADSW, volume 7)

The research area of ontology engineering seems to have reached a certain level of maturity, considering the vast amount of contemporary methods and tools for formalising and applying knowledge representation models. However, there is still little understanding of, and support for, the evolutionary aspects of ontologies. This is particularly crucial in distributed and collaborative settings such as the Semantic Web, where ontologies naturally co-evolve with their communities of use. For managing the evolution of single ontologies, established techniques from data schema evolution have been successfully adopted, and consensus on a general ontology evolution process model seems to emerge. Much less explored, however, is the problem of evolution of interorganisational ontologies. In this “complex” and dynamic setting, a collaborative change process model requires more powerful engineering, argumentation and negotiation methodologies, complemented by support for context dependency management.. It turns out that much can be learned from other domains where formal artefacts are being collaboratively engineered. In particular, the field of system engineering offers a wealth of techniques and tools for versioning, merging and evolving software artefacts, and many of these techniques can be reused in an ontology engineering setting. Based on this insight, this chapter gives a unified overview of the wide variety of models and mechanisms that can be used to support all of the above aspects of ontology evolution. The key remaining challenge is to construct a single framework, based on these mechanisms, which can be tailored for the needs of a particular environment.

Keywords

collaborative ontology engineering context dependency management ontology evolution ontology versioning 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Andany, J., Léonard, M., and Palisser, C. (1991) Management of Schema Evolution in Databases. In Proc. of the 17th Int’l Conf. on Very Large Data Bases (Barcelona, Spain), Morgan-Kaufmann, pp. 161-170Google Scholar
  2. Aschoff, F. R., Schmalhofer, F., van Elst, L. (2004) Knowledge mediation: A procedure for the cooperative construction of domain ontologies. In Proc. of Workshop on Agent-Mediated Knowledge Management at the 16th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI’2004) (Valencia, Spain), pp. 20-28Google Scholar
  3. Bachimont, B., Troncy, R., Isaac, A. (2002) Semantic commitment for designing ontologies: a proposal. In Gómez-Pérez, A., Richard Benjamins, V., eds.: Proc. of the 13th Int’l Conf. on Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management. Ontologies and the SemanticWeb (EKAW 2002) (Siguenza, Spain), Springer Verlag, pp. 114-121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Banerjee, J., Kim, W. Kim, H., and Korth., H. (1987) Semantics and implementation of schema evolution in object-oriented databases. Proc. ACM SIGMOD Conf. Management of Data, 16(3), pp. 311-322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bennett, K. and Rajlich, V. (2000) Software Maintenance and Evolution: A Roadmap. In: Finkelstein, A. (ed. ) The Future of Sotware Engineering, Finkelstein, ACM Press.Google Scholar
  6. Boehm, B. W. (1988). A spiral model of software development and enhancement. IEEE Computer 21(5), IEEE Computer Society Press, pp. 61-72Google Scholar
  7. Bouaud, J., Bachimont, B., Charlet, J., and Zweigenbaum, P. (1995) Methodological Principles for Structuring an “Ontology. ” In Proc. IJCAI95 Workshop on Basic Ontological Issues in Knowledge Sharing” (Montreal, Canada)Google Scholar
  8. Bohner, S. and Arnold, R. (1996) Software change impact analysis. IEEE Computer Society PressGoogle Scholar
  9. Brachman, R., McGuiness, D., Patel-Schneider, P., Resnik, L., and Borgida, A. (1991) Living with classic: When and how to use a KL-ONE-like language. In Sowa, J., ed.: Principles of Semantic Networks, Morgan Kaufmann, pp. 401-456Google Scholar
  10. Chikofsky, E. J. and Cross, J. H. (1990) Reverse engineering and design recovery: A taxonomy. IEEE Software 7(1), pp. 13-17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chaudhri, V. K., Farquhar, A., Fikes, R., Karp, P. D, and Rice, J. P. (1998) OKBC: A Programmatic Foundation for Knowledge Base Interoperability. In Proc. AAAI’98 Conference (Madison, WI), AAAI PressGoogle Scholar
  12. Clarke, E. M., Grumberg, O., and Peled, D. A. (2000) Model Checking, MIT Press.Google Scholar
  13. Codd, E. (1972) Further Normalisation of the Database Relational Model. In Rustin, R. (ed.) Database Systems, Prentice-Hall, pp. 33-74Google Scholar
  14. Conradi, R. and Westfechtel, B. (1998) Version Models for Software Configuration Management. ACM Computing Surveys 30(2): 232-282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. de Bruijn, J., Lausen, H., Pollares, A., and Fensel, D. (2006) The Web Service Modeling Language WSML: An Overview. In Proc. 3rd European Semantic Web Conference (ESWC 2006). LNCS 4011, SpringerGoogle Scholar
  16. De Leenheer, P. (2004) Revising and Managing Multiple Ontology Versions in a Possible Worlds Setting. In Proc. On The Move to Meaningful Internet Systems Ph. D. Symposium (OTM 2004) (Agia Napa, Cyprus), LNCS 3292, Springer-Verlag, pp. 798-818Google Scholar
  17. De Leenheer, P., de Moor, A. (2005) Context-driven disambiguation in ontology elicitation. In Shvaiko, P., Euzenat, J., eds.: Context and Ontologies: Theory, Practice, and Applications. Proc. 1st Context and Ontologies Workshop, AAAI/IAAI 2005 (Pittsburgh, USA), pp. 17-24Google Scholar
  18. De Leenheer, P., de Moor, A., and Meersman, R. (2007) Context Dependency Management in Ontology Engineering: a Formal Approach. Journal on Data Semantics VIII, LNCS 4380, Springer-Verlag, pp. 26-56Google Scholar
  19. De Leenheer, P., Kopecky, J., Sharf, E., and de Moor, A. (2006) A Versioning Tool for Ontologies. DIP EU Project (FP6-507483) WP2: Ontology Management, Deliverable nr. D2. 4Google Scholar
  20. de Moor, A. (2002) Language/action meets organisational semiotics: Situating conversations with norms. Information Systems Frontiers, 4(3):257-272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. de Moor, A. (2005) Ontology-guided meaning negotiation in communities of practice. In Mambrey, P., Gräther, W., eds.: Proc. Workshop on the Design for Large-Scale Digital Communities, 2nd Int’l Conf. Communities and Technologies (C&T 2005) (Milano, Italy)Google Scholar
  22. de Moor, A., De Leenheer, P., and Meersman, R. (2006) DOGMA-MESS: A meaning evolution support system for interorganisational ontology engineering. In Proc. 14th Int’l Conf. Conceptual Structures (ICCS 2006) (Aalborg, Denmark), LNAI 4068, Springer Verlag, pp 189-203Google Scholar
  23. de Moor, A. and Weigand, H. (2007) Formalizing the evolution of virtual communities. Inf. Syst., 32(2):223-247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. De Troyer, O. (1993) On Data Schema Transformation, PhD Thesis, University of Tilburg, Tilburg, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  25. Diaz, A. (2005) Supporting Divergences in Knowledge Sharing Communities. PhD Thesis, Univesité Henry Poincarè, Nancy I, France.Google Scholar
  26. Edwards, W. K. (1997) Flexible Conflict Detection and Management in Collaborative Applications, Proc. Symp. User Interface Software and Technology, ACM PressGoogle Scholar
  27. Ehrig, H., Kreowski, H. -J., Montanari, U., and Rozenberg G. (1999) Handbook of Graph Grammars and Computing by Graph Transformation, Volume 3, World ScientificGoogle Scholar
  28. Euzenat, J., Le Bach, T., Barrasa, J., et al. (2004) State of the art on ontology alignment. Knowledge Web deliverable KWEB/2004/d2. 2. 3/v1. 2Google Scholar
  29. Feather, M. S. (1998) “Detecting Interference when Merging Specification Evolutions, ” Proc. 5th Int’l Workshop Software Specification and Design, ACM Press, pp. 169-176.Google Scholar
  30. Fellbaum, C., ed. (1998) Wordnet, an Electronic Lexical Database. MIT PressGoogle Scholar
  31. Franconi, E., Grandi, F., and Mandreoli, F. (2000) A Semantic Approach for Schema Evolution and Versioning in Object-oriented Databases. In Proc. 6th Int’l Conf. Rules and Objects in Databases (DOOD 2000) (London, UK), Springer-Verlag, pp. 1048-1060Google Scholar
  32. Fogel, K. and Bar, M. (2001) Open Source Development with CVS. The Coriolis Group, 2nd editionGoogle Scholar
  33. Gabel, T., Sure, Y., and Voelker, J. (2004) KAON — Ontology Management Infrastructure. SEKT deliverable D3. 1. 1. aGoogle Scholar
  34. Gaševic, D., Djuric, D., and Devedžic, V. (2006) Model Driven Architecture and Ontology Development, SpringerGoogle Scholar
  35. Gómez-Pérez, A., Manzano-Macho, D. (2003) A survey of ontology learning methods and techniques. OntoWeb Deliverable D1. 5Google Scholar
  36. Gray, J. (1981). The transaction concept: Virtues and limitations. Proc. 7th Int’l Conf. Very Large Data Bases, pp. 144-154Google Scholar
  37. Gruber, T. R. (1993) A translation approach to portable ontologies. Knowledge Acquisition 5(2):199-220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Guarino, N. (1998) Formal Ontology and Information Systems. In Guarino, N. (ed. ), Proc. 1st Int’l Conf. Formal Ontologies in Information Systems (FOIS98) (Trento, Italy), pp. 3--15, IOS PressGoogle Scholar
  39. Haase, P., Sure, Y., and Vrandečić, D. (2004) Ontology Management and Evolution: Survey, Methods, and Prototypes. SEKT Deliverable D3. 1. 1Google Scholar
  40. Haase, P. and Stojanovic, P. (2005) Consistent evolution of OWL ontologies. Proc. 2nd European Conf. Semantic Web: Research and Applications. LNCS 3532, Springer, pp. 182-197Google Scholar
  41. Halpin, T. (2001) Information Modeling and Relational Databases(From Conceptual Analysis to Logical Design). Morgan KauffmanGoogle Scholar
  42. Heflin, J. (2001) Towards the SemanticWeb: Knowledge Representation in a Dynamic, Distributed Environment. PhD thesis, University of Maryland, Collega Park, MD, USAGoogle Scholar
  43. Hepp, M., Van Damme, C., and Siorpaes, K. (2007) Folksontology: An integrated approach for turning folksonomies into ontologies. In Proc. of the ESWC Workshop “Bridging the Gap between Semantic Web and Web 2. 0” (Innsbruck, Austria). SpringerGoogle Scholar
  44. Hepp, M. (2007) Possible Ontologies: How Reality Constrains the Development of Relevant Ontologies. In Internet Computing 11(1):90-96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Holsapple, C., and Joshi, K. (2002) Collaborative Approach in Ontology Design, Communications of the ACM 45(2), ACM Press, pp. 42-47Google Scholar
  46. Hunt, J. W., McIllroy, M. D. (1976) An Algorithm for Differential File Comparison, Technical Report 41, AT&T Bell Laboratories Inc.Google Scholar
  47. Jackson, D., and Ladd, D. A. (1994) Semantic Diff: A tool for summarizing the effects of modifications. In Proc. Of the Int’l Conf. on Software Maintenance (ICSM), pp. 243-252, IEEE Computer SocietyGoogle Scholar
  48. Jarrar, M., Demey, J., Meersman, R. (2003) On reusing conceptual data modeling for ontology engineering. Journal on Data Semantics 1(1):185-207Google Scholar
  49. Jarrar, M. (2006) Position paper: towards the notion of gloss, and the adoption of linguistic resources in formal ontology engineering. In Proc WWW 2006. ACM Press, pp. 497-503Google Scholar
  50. Kalfoglou, Y., Schorlemmer, M. (2005) Ontology mapping: The state of the art. In Proc. Dagstuhl Seminar on Semantic Interoperability and Integration (Dagstuhl, Germany).Google Scholar
  51. Katz, R. H. (1990) Toward a Unified Framework for Version Modeling in Engineering Databases. ACM Computing Surveys 22(4):375-408, ACM PressGoogle Scholar
  52. Kim, W. and Chou, H. (1988) Versions of Schema for Object-oriented Databases. In Proc. 14th Int’l Conf. Very Large Data Bases (VLDB88) (L. A., CA. ), Morgan Kaufmann. pp. 148-159Google Scholar
  53. Kiryakov, A., Ognyanov, D., and Kirov, V. (2004) A Framework for Representing Ontologies Consisting of Several Thousand Concepts Definitions. DIP Project Deliverable D2. 2.Google Scholar
  54. Klein, M., Kiryakov, A., Ognyanov, D., and Fensel, D. (2002) Ontology Versioning and Change Detection on the Web. Proc. 13th European Conf. Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management, pp. 192-212Google Scholar
  55. Klein, M. and Noy, N. (2003) A Component-based Framework for Ontology Evolution. In Proc. Workshop on Ontologies and Distributed Systems, IJCAI 2003 (Acapulco, Mexico).Google Scholar
  56. Klein, M. (2004) Change Management for Distributed Ontologies. PhD Thesis, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  57. Kotis, K., Vouros, G. A., Alonso, J. P. (2004) HCOME: tool-supported methodology for collaboratively devising living ontologies. In Proc. of the 2nd Int’l Workshop on Semantic Web and Databases (SWDB 2004), SpringerGoogle Scholar
  58. Kunz, W., Rittel, H. W. J. (1970) Issues as elements of information systems. Working Paper 131, Institute of Urban and Regional Development, University of CaliforniaGoogle Scholar
  59. Lerner, B. and Habermann, A. (1990) Beyond Schema Evolution to Database Reorganization. In Proc. Joint ACM OOPSLA/ECOOP 90 Conf. Object-Oriented Programming: Systems, Languages, and Applications (Ottawa, Canada), ACM Press, pp. 67-76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Lerner, B. (2000) A model for compound type changes encountered in schema evolution. ACM Transactions on Database Systems (TODS), 25(1):83{127, ACM Press, New York, NY, USA.Google Scholar
  61. Lippe, E. and van Oosterom, N. (1992) Operation-Based Merging. In Proc. 5th ACM SIGSOFT Symp. Software Development Environments, ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes, Vol. 17, No. 5, pp. 78-87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Littlejohn, S. W. (1992) Theories of human communication(4th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing CompanyGoogle Scholar
  63. Madhavji, N. H.,, Fernandez-Ramil, J. and Perry, D. E. (2006) Software evolution and feedback: Theory and practice. WileyGoogle Scholar
  64. Maedche, A., Motik, B. and Stojanovic, L. (2003) Managing multiple and distributed ontologies on the Semantic Web. VLDB Journal 12, Springer, pp. 286-302Google Scholar
  65. McCarthy, J. (1993) Notes on formalizing context. In Proc. 15th Int’l Joint Conf. Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI93) (Chambry, France), 555-560. Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
  66. Meersman, R. (1999) The use of lexicons and other computer-linguistic tools in semantics, design and cooperation of database systems. In Proc. Conf. Cooperative Database Systems (CODAS99), Springer Verlag, pp. 1-14.Google Scholar
  67. Mens, T. (1999) Conditional Graph Rewriting as a Domain-Independent Formalism for Software Evolution. Proc. Int’l Conf. Agtive 1999: Applications of Graph Transformations with Industrial Relevance. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 1779, Springer-Verlag, pp. 127-143Google Scholar
  68. Mens, T. (1999) A Formal Foundation for Object-Oriented Software Evolution. PhD Thesis, Department of Computer Science, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, BelgiumGoogle Scholar
  69. Mens, T. (2002) A State-of-the-Art Survey on Software Merging. Transactions on Software Engineering 28(5): 449-462, IEEE Computer Society PressGoogle Scholar
  70. Mens, T., Van Der Straeten, R., and D’hondt, M. (2006) Detecting and resolving model inconsistencies using transformation dependency analysis. In Proc. Int’l Conf. MoDELS/UML 2006, LNCS 4199, Springer, pp. 200-214Google Scholar
  71. Mens, T., Taentzer, G., and Runge, O. (2007) Analyzing Refactoring Dependencies Using Graph Transformation. Journal on Software and Systems Modeling, September, Springer, pp. 269-285Google Scholar
  72. Mens, T. andDemeyer, S. (2007) Software Evolution. SpringerGoogle Scholar
  73. Munson, J. P. and Dewan, P. (1994) A flexible object merging framework. In Proc. ACM Conf. Computer Supported Collaborative Work, ACM Press, pp. 231-241Google Scholar
  74. Nguyen, G. and Rieu, D. (1989) Schema Evolution in Object-Oriented Database Systems. Data and Knowledge Engineering 4(1):43-67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Nonaka, I. and Takeuchi,, H. (1995) The Knowledge-Creating Company: How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation. Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
  76. Noy, N. F., Klein, M.: Ontology evolution: Not the same as schema evolution. Knowledge and Information Systems 6(4) (2004) 428-440CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Noy, N. F. and Musen, M. A. (2002). PromptDiff: A Fixed-Point Algorithm for Comparing Ontology Versions. In the Proc. 18th National Conf. Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-2002) (Edmonton, Alberta), AAAI PressGoogle Scholar
  78. Nuseibeh, B., Easterbrook, S., and Russo, A. (2000) Leveraging inconsistency in software development. IEEE Computer, 33(4):24-29Google Scholar
  79. Oliver, D., Shahar, Y., Musen, M., Shortliffe, E. (1999) Representation of change in controlled medical terminologies. AI in Medicine 15(1):53-76Google Scholar
  80. Parsia, B., Sirin, E., and Kalyanpur, A. (2005) Debugging OWL ontologies. Proc. 14th Int’l Conf. World Wide Web, ACM Press, pp. 633-640Google Scholar
  81. Penney, D. and Stein, J. (1987) Class Modification in the GemStone Object-oriented DBMS. In Proc. Int’l Conf. Object-Oriented Programming Systems, Languages, and Applications (OOPSLA) (Orlando, FL), pp. 111-117.Google Scholar
  82. Peters, R. and Özsu, M. (1997) An Axiomatic Model of Dynamic Schema Evolution in Objectbase Systems. ACM Transactions on Database Systems 22(1):75-114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Plessers, P. and De Troyer, O. (2006) Resolving Inconsistencies in Evolving Ontologies. In Proc. 3rd European Semantic Web Conference (ESWC 2006), Springer, pp. 200-214Google Scholar
  84. Plessers, P. (2006) An Approach to Web-based Ontology Evolution. PhD Thesis, Department of Computer Science, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussel, BelgiumGoogle Scholar
  85. Proper, H. A. and Halpin, T. A. (1998) Conceptual Schema Optimisation: Database Optimisation before sliding down the Waterfall. Technical Report 341, Department of Computer Science, University of Queensland, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  86. Putnam, L. and Poole, M. (1987) Conflict and Negotiation. In Porter, L. (ed. ) Handbook of Organizational Communication: an Interdisciplinary Perspective, pp. 549-599, Newbury Park: SageGoogle Scholar
  87. Ra, Y. and Rundensteiner, E. (1997) A Transparant Schema-evolution System Based on Object-oriented view technology. IEEE Trans. of Knowledge and Data Engineering, 9 (4):600-623CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Rajlich, V. (1997) A model for change propagation based on graph rewriting. Proc. Int’l Conf. Software Maintenance, IEEE Computer Society Press, pp. 84-91Google Scholar
  89. Ramil, J. F. (2003) Continual Resource Estimation for Evolving Software. PhD Thesis, Department of Computing, Imperial College, London, United KingdomGoogle Scholar
  90. Reinberger, M. L., Spyns, P. (2005) Unsupervised text mining for the learning of DOGMA-inspired ontologies. In: Buitelaar P., Handschuh S., and Magnini B., (eds.), Ontology Learning and Population, IOS PressGoogle Scholar
  91. Roddick, J., Craske, N., and Richards, T. (1993) A Taxonomy for Schema Versioning Based on the Relational and Entity Relationship Models, In Proc. the 12th Int’l Conf. on Conceptual Modeling / the Entity Relationship Approach (Dallas, TX), Springer, pp. 143-154Google Scholar
  92. Roddick, J. (1995) A Survey of Schema Versioning Issues for Database Systems, in Information and Software Technology 37(7):383-393CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Roman, D., Keller, U., Lausen, H., de Bruijn, J., Lara, R., Stollberg, M., Polleres, A., Feier, C., Bussler, C., and Fensel, D. (2005) Web Service Modeling Ontology. In Journal of Applied Ontology 1(1):77-106, IOS PressGoogle Scholar
  94. Sanderson, D. (1994) Cooperative and collaborative mediated research. In Harrison, T. and Stephen, T. (eds.) Computer networking and scholarly communication in the twenty-first century, State University of New York Press, pp. 95-114Google Scholar
  95. Skarra, A. H. and Zdonik, S. B. (1986) The Management of Changing Types in an Objectoriented Database. In Proc. Int’l Conf. on Object-Oriented Programming Systems, Languages, and Applications (OOPSLA 1986) (Portland, Oregon), pp. 483-495Google Scholar
  96. Sneed, H. (1995) Estimating the Costs of Software Maintenance Tasks. In Proc. Int’l Conf. Sotware Maintenance (ICSM), pp. 168-181Google Scholar
  97. Sowa, J. (1984) Conceptual Structures: Information Processing in Mind and Machine. Addison-WesleyGoogle Scholar
  98. Schoop, M., de Moor, A., Dietz, J. (2006) The pragmatic web: A manifesto. Communications of the ACM 49(5)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Simperl, E., Tempich, C., and Mochol, M. (2007) Cost estimation for ontology development: applying the ONTOCOM model. In Abramowicz, W. and Mayr, H. Technologies for Business Information Systems, Springer, pp. 327-339Google Scholar
  100. Spanoudakis, G. and Zisman, A. (2001) Inconsistency management in software engineering: Survey and open research issues. Handbook of software engineering and knowledge engineering, World Scientific, pp. 329-390Google Scholar
  101. Spyns, P., Meersman, R., Jarrar, M. (2002) Data modelling versus ontology engineering. SIGMODRecord 31(4):12-17Google Scholar
  102. Stamper, R. (1992) Linguistic Instruments in Knowledge Engineering, chapter Language and Computing in Organised Behaviour, Elsevier Science Publishers, pp. 143-163Google Scholar
  103. Stojanovic, L., Maedche, A., Motik, B., and Stojanovic, N. (2002) User-driven ontology evolution management. Proc. 13th European Conf. Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management. pp. 285-300Google Scholar
  104. Stojanovic, L. (2004) Methods and tools for ontology evolution. PhD Thesis, University of Karlsruhe, Karlsruhe, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  105. Tempich, C., Pinto, S., Sure, Y., and Staab, S. (2005) An Argumentation Ontology for Distributed, Loosely-controlled and evolving Engineering processes of ontologies. In Proc. of the 2nd European Semantic Web Conference (ESWC, 2005), LNCS 3532, Springer, pp. 241-256Google Scholar
  106. Verheijen, G., Van Bekkum, J. (1982) NIAM, an information analysis method. In: Proc. IFIP TC-8 Conf. Comparative Review of Information System Methodologies (CRIS 82), North-HollandGoogle Scholar
  107. Wang, H., Horridge, M., Rector, A., Drummond, N., and Seidenberg, J. (2005) Debugging OWL-DL ontologies: A heuristic approach. Proc. 4th Int’l Conf. Semantic Web. Springer-VerlagGoogle Scholar
  108. Westfechtel, B. (1991) Structure-Oriented Merging of Revisions of Software Documents. Proc. Int’l Workshop on Software Configuration Management. ACM Press, pp. 68-79Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Pieter De Leenheer
    • 1
  • Tom Mens
    • 2
  1. 1.Vrije Universiteit BrusselBelgium
  2. 2.Software Engineering LabUniversité de Mons-HainautBelgium

Personalised recommendations