By far the best known standard for registering and searching for services is the UDDI. A great weakness of this standard is its technology-driven way of specifying services; it is still inadequate for specifying the majority of aspects that are relevant from a business point of view. This stands in sharp contrast to the main premises of SOA, i.e. increased flexibility by the reuse of services and better business/IT-alignment by speaking the same language. A more comprehensive approach to specifying services is the business component specification framework. One of the aspects that needs to be specified according to this framework are the business tasks. The framework, however, does not define precisely what a task is and how a task should be identified. In this paper we propose taking the enterprise ontology as a starting point for specifying these tasks. Furthermore, we demonstrate our approach using a life insurance company case.


SOA service specification enterprise ontology 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Henkel, J.Z.M., Johannesson, P.: Service-based processes: design for business and technology. In: ICSOC 2004: Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on Service oriented computing, pp. 21–29. ACM Press, New York (2004)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Albani, A., Dietz, J.: The benefit of enterprise ontology in identifying business components. In: WCC 2006: Proceedings of the IFIP World Computer Congress, Santiago de Chile, Chile (2006)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    McGovern, J., Sims, O., Jain, A., Little, M.: Enterprise Service Oriented Architectures: Concepts, Challenges, Recommendations. Springer, New York (2006)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Erradi, A., Anand, S., Kulkarni, N.: Evaluation of strategies for integrating legacy applications as services in a service oriented architecture. In: SCC 2006: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Services Computing, Washington, DC, USA, pp. 257–260. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    W3C. Web services description language (wsdl) 1.1 (March 2001),
  6. 6.
    Dietz, J.L.G.: Enterprise Ontology, Theory and Methodology. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ackermann, J., et al.: Standardized specification of business components. Memorandum of the working group 5.10.3, Component Oriented Business Application Systems (2002)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    OASIS. Advancing web service discovery standard (June 2007),
  9. 9.
    OASIS. Uddi products and components (June 2007),
  10. 10.
    Colasuonno, F., Coppi, A., Stefano, Ragone, Scorcia, L., Di Noia, T., Di Sciascio, E.: juddi+: A semantic web services registry enabling semantic discovery and composition. In: The 8th IEEE Conference on E-Commerce Technology and the 3rd IEEE Conference on Enterprise Computing (2006)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Luo, J., Montrose, B., Kim, A., Khashnobish, A., Kang, M.: Adding owl-s support to the existing uddi infrastructure. In: ICWS 2006: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Web Services (ICWS 2006), Washington, DC, USA, pp. 153–162. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    WSMO. D10 v0.1 wsmo registry (June 2007),
  13. 13.
    Rajasekaran, P., Miller, J.A., Verma, K., Sheth, A.P.: Enhancing web services description and discovery to facilitate composition. In: Cardoso, J., Sheth, A.P. (eds.) SWSWPC 2004. LNCS, vol. 3387, pp. 55–68. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Colgrave, J., Akkiraju, R., Goodwin, R.: External matching in uddi. In: ICWS 2004: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Web Services (ICWS 2004), Washington, DC, USA, p. 226. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Yan, Z., Cimpian, E., Zaremba, M., Mazzara, M.: Bpmo: Semantic business process modeling and wsmo extension. In: ICWS, pp. 1185–1186. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2007)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Zaha, J.M., Albani, A.: Tool based support for teaching formal specification of business components. Teaching Formal Methods: Practice and Experience. Oxford, Great Britain (2003)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Fettke, P., Loos, P.: Specification of business components. In: Aksit, M., Mezini, M., Unland, R. (eds.) NODe 2002. LNCS, vol. 2591, pp. 62–75. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Baida, Z., Gordijn, J., Omelayenko, B.: A shared service terminology for online service provisioning. In: ICEC 2004: Proceedings of the 6th international conference on Electronic commerce, Delft, The Netherlands, pp. 1–10. ACM Press, New York (2004)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Active Endpoints Inc. et al.: Ws-bpel extension for people (bpel4people), version 1.0 (June 2007),

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Linda Terlouw
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Delft University of TechnologyDelftThe Netherlands
  2. 2.OrdinaNieuwegeinThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations