Ontology Engineering – The DOGMA Approach

  • Mustafa Jarrar
  • Robert Meersman
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4891)


This chapter presents a methodological framework for ontology engineering (called DOGMA), which is aimed to guide ontology builders towards building ontologies that are both highly reusable and usable, easier to build and to maintain. We survey the main foundational challenges in ontology engineering and analyse to what extent one can build an ontology independently of application requirements at hand. We discuss ontology reusability verses ontology usability and present the DOGMA approach, its philosophy and formalization, which prescribe that an ontology be built as separate domain axiomatization and application axiomatizations. While a domain axiomatization focuses on the characterization of the intended meaning (i.e. intended models) of a vocabulary at the domain level, application axiomatizations focus on the usability of this vocabulary according to certain application/usability perspectives and specify the legal models (a subset of the intended models) of the application(s)’ interest. We show how specification languages (such as ORM, UML, EER, and OWL) can be effectively (re)used in ontology engineering.


Description Logic Linguistic Term Domain Concept Intended Meaning Domain 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.


  1. [BC88]
    Bylander, T., Chandrasekaran, B.: Generic tasks in knowledge-based reasoning: The right level of abstraction for knowledge acquisition. In: Knowledge Acquisition for Knowledge Based Systems, vol. 1, pp. 65–77. Academic Press, London (1988)Google Scholar
  2. [BHGSS03]
    Bouquet, P., van Harmelen, F., Giunchiglia, F., Serafini, L., Stuckenschmidt, H.: C-OWL: Contextualizing ontologies. In: Fensel, D., Sycara, K.P., Mylopoulos, J. (eds.) ISWC 2003. LNCS, vol. 2870, pp. 164–179. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [BM99]
    Bench-Capon, T.J.M., Malcolm, G.: Formalising Ontologies and Their Relations. In: Bench-Capon, T.J.M., Soda, G., Tjoa, A.M. (eds.) DEXA 1999. LNCS, vol. 1677, pp. 250–259. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [BSZS06]
    Bouquet, P., Serafini, L., Zanobini, S., Sceffer, S.: Bootstrapping semantics on the web: meaning elicitation from schemas. In: Proceedings of the World Wide Web Conf (WWW 2006), pp. 505–512. ACM Press, New York (2006)Google Scholar
  5. [CGDL01]
    Calvanese, D., De Giacomo, G., Lenzerini, M.: Identification constraints and functional dependencies in description logics. In: Proceedings of the 17th Int. Joint Conf. on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI 2001), pp. 155–160 (2001)Google Scholar
  6. [CJB99]
    Chandrasekaran, B., Johnson, R., Benjamins, R.: Ontologies: what are they? why do we need, them? IEEE Intelligent Systems and Their Applications 14(1), 20–26 (1999); Special Issue on OntologiesCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [DDM06]
    De Moor, A., De Leenheer, P., Meersman, M.: DOGMA-MESS: A Meaning Evolution Support System for Interorganizational Ontology Engineering. In: Schärfe, H., Hitzler, P., Øhrstrøm, P. (eds.) ICCS 2006. LNCS, vol. 4068, pp. 189–202. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [DDM07]
    De Leenheer, P., de Moor, A., Meersman, R.: Context Dependency Management in Ontology Engineering: a Formal Approach. In: Spaccapietra, S., Atzeni, P., Fages, F., Hacid, M.-S., Kifer, M., Mylopoulos, J., Pernici, B., Shvaiko, P., Trujillo, J., Zaihrayeu, I. (eds.) Journal on Data Semantics VIII. LNCS, vol. 4380, pp. 26–56. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [DHHS01]
    Degen, W., Heller, B., Herre, H., Smith, B.: GOL: Towards an Axiomatized Upper-Level Ontology. In: Formal Ontology in Information Systems. Proceedings of the FOIS 2001, pp. 34–46. ACM Press, New York (2001)Google Scholar
  10. [DM05]
    De Leenheer, P., Meersman, R.: Towards a formal foundation of DOGMA ontology Part I: Lexon base and concept definition server, TR STAR-2005-06, Brussel (2005)Google Scholar
  11. [DSM04]
    De Bo, J., Spyns, P., Meersman, R.: Assisting Ontology Integration with Existing Thesauri. In: Meersman, R., Tari, Z. (eds.) OTM 2004. LNCS, vol. 3290, pp. 801–818. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [G04]
    Gangemi, A.: Some design patterns for domain ontology building and analysis. An online presentation (April 2004),
  13. [G94]
    Guarino, N.: The Ontological Level. In: Casati, R., Smith, B., White, G. (eds.) Philosophy and the Cognitive Science, pp. 443–456. Hölder-Pichler-Tempsky, Vienna (1994)Google Scholar
  14. [G95]
    Gruber, T.: Toward principles for the design of ontologies used for knowledge sharing. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 43(5/6) (1995)Google Scholar
  15. [G98a]
    Guarino, N.: Formal Ontology in Information Systems. In: Proceedings of FOIS 1998, pp. 3–15. IOS Press, Amsterdam (1998)Google Scholar
  16. [G98b]
    Guarino, N.: Some Ontological Principles for Designing Upper Level Lexical Resources. In: Rubio, A., Gallardo, N., Castro, R., Tejada, A. (eds.) Proceedings of First International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation. ELRA - European Language Resources Association, Granada, Spain (1998)Google Scholar
  17. [GG95]
    Guarino, N., Giaretta, P.: Ontologies and Knowledge Bases: Towards a Terminological Clarification. In: Mars, N. (ed.) Towards Very Large Knowledge Bases: Knowledge Building and Knowledge Sharing, pp. 25–32. IOS Press, Amsterdam (1995)Google Scholar
  18. [GGMO01]
    Gangemi, A., Guarino, N., Masolo, C., Oltramari, A.: Understanding toplevel ontological distinctions. In: Proceedings of IJCAI 2001 Workshop on Ontologies and Information Sharing, pp. 26–33. AAAI Press, Seattle (2001)Google Scholar
  19. [GGO02]
    Gangemi, A., Guarino, N., Oltramari, A., Borgo, S.: Cleaning-up WordNet’s top-level. In: Proceedings of the 1st International WordNet Conference (January 2002)Google Scholar
  20. [GHW02]
    Guizzardi, G., Herre, H., Wagner, G.: Towards Ontological Foundations for UML Conceptual Models. In: Meersman, R., Tari, Z., et al. (eds.) CoopIS 2002, DOA 2002, and ODBASE 2002. LNCS, vol. 2519, pp. 1100–1117. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. [GN87]
    Genesereth, M.R., Nilsson, N.J.: Logical Foundation of Artificial Intelligence. Morgan Kaufmann, Los Altos (1987)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. [GW02]
    Guarino, N., Welty, C.: Evaluating Ontological Decisions with OntoClean. Communications of the ACM 45(2), 61–65 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. [HST99]
    Horrocks, I., Sattler, U., Tobies, S.: Practical reasoning for expressive description logics. In: Ganzinger, H., McAllester, D., Voronkov, A. (eds.) LPAR 1999. LNCS, vol. 1705, pp. 161–180. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. [Inn+03]
    Persidis, A., Niederée, C., Muscogiuri, C., Bouquet, P., Wynants, M.: Innovation Engineering for the Support of Scientific Discovery. Innovanet Project (IST-2001-38422), deliverable D1 (2003)Google Scholar
  25. [J05]
    Jarrar, M.: Towards Methodological Principles for Ontology Engineering. PhD thesis, Vrije Universiteit Brussel (May 2005)Google Scholar
  26. [J05a]
    Jarrar, M.: Modularization and automatic composition of Object-Role Modeling (ORM) Schemes. In: Meersman, R., Tari, Z., Herrero, P. (eds.) OTM-WS 2005. LNCS, vol. 3762, pp. 613–625. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. [J06]
    Jarrar, M.: Towards the notion of gloss, and the adoption of linguistic resources in formal ontology engineering. In: Proceedings of the 15th International World Wide Web Conference (WWW 2006), Scotland, pp. 497–503. ACM Press, New York (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. [J07c]
    Jarrar, M.: Towards Effectiveness and Transparency in e-Business Transactions, An Ontology for Customer Complaint Management, ch. 7. Semantic Web Methodologies for E-Business Applications. IGI Global (October 2008) ISBN: 978-1-60566-066-0Google Scholar
  29. [J07]
    Jarrar, M.: Towards Automated Reasoning on ORM Schemes. -Mapping ORM into the DLR_idf description logic. In: Parent, C., Schewe, K.-D., Storey, V.C., Thalheim, B. (eds.) ER 2007. LNCS, vol. 4801, pp. 181–197. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. [J07b]
    Jarrar, M.: Mapping ORM into the SHOIN/OWL Description Logic- Towards a Methodological and Expressive Graphical Notation for Ontology Engineering. In: Meersman, R., Tari, Z., Herrero, P. (eds.) OTM-WS 2007, Part I. LNCS, vol. 4805, pp. 729–741. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. [JDM03]
    Jarrar, M., Demy, J., Meersman, R.: On Using Conceptual Data Modeling for Ontology Engineering. In: Spaccapietra, S., March, S., Aberer, K. (eds.) Journal on Data Semantics I. LNCS, vol. 2800, pp. 185–207. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. [JE06]
    Jarrar, M., Eldammagh, M.: Reasoning on ORM using Racer. Technical report, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium (August. 2006)Google Scholar
  33. [JH07]
    Jarrar, M., Heymans, S.: Towards Pattern-based Reasoning for Friendly Ontology Debugging. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Tools 17(4) (August 2008)Google Scholar
  34. [JM02a]
    Jarrar, M., Meersman, R.: Formal Ontology Engineering in the DOGMA Approach. In: Meersman, R., Tari, Z., et al. (eds.) CoopIS 2002, DOA 2002, and ODBASE 2002. LNCS, vol. 2519, pp. 1238–1254. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. [KN03]
    Klein, M., Noy: A component-based framework for ontology evolution. Technical Report IR-504, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (March 2003)Google Scholar
  36. [KTT03]
    Kerremans, K., Temmerman, R., Tummers, J.: Representing multilingual and culture-specific knowledge in a VAT regulatory ontology: support from the termontography approach. In: OTM 2003 Workshops. Springer, Tübingen (2003)Google Scholar
  37. [M55]
    Martinet, A.: Economie des changements phonétiques, pp. 157–158. Francke, Berne (1955)Google Scholar
  38. [M93]
    McCarthy, J.: Notes on Formalizing Context. In: Proceedings of IJCAI 1993. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1993)Google Scholar
  39. [M96]
    Meersman, R.: An essay on the Role and Evolution of Data(base) Semantics. In: Meersman, R., Mark, L. (eds.) Proceeding of the IFIP WG 2.6 Working Conference on Database Applications Semantics (DS-6). CHAPMAN & HALL, Atlanta (1996)Google Scholar
  40. [M99a]
    Meersman, R.: The Use of Lexicons and Other Computer-Linguistic Tools. In: Zhang, Y., Rusinkiewicz, M., Kambayashi, Y. (eds.) Semantics, Design and Cooperation of Database Systems, The International Symposium on Cooperative Database Systems for Advanced Applications (CODAS 1999), pp. 1–14. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)Google Scholar
  41. [M99b]
    Meersman, R.: Semantic Ontology Tools in Information System Design. In: Ras, Z., Zemankova, M. (eds.) Proceedings of the ISMIS 1999 Conference. LNCS, vol. 1609, pp. 30–45. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)Google Scholar
  42. [M01]
    Meersman, R.: Ontologies and Databases: More than a Fleeting Resemblance. In: d’Atri, A., Missikoff, M. (eds.) OES/SEO 2001 Rome Workshop. Luiss Publications (2001)Google Scholar
  43. [MBFGM90]
    Miller, G., Beckwith, R., Fellbaum, F., Gross, D., Miller, K.: Introduction to wordnet: an on-line lexical database. International Journal of Lexicography 3(4), 235–244 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. [N90]
    Nöth, W.: Handbook of Semiotics. Indiana University Press, Bloomington (1990)Google Scholar
  45. [NM02]
    Nakhimovsky, A., Myers, T.: Web Services: Description, Interfaces and Ontology. In: Geroimenko, V., Chen, C. (eds.) Visualizing the Semantic Web, pp. 135–150. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)Google Scholar
  46. [P05]
    Pretorius, A.J.: Visual Analysis for Ontology Engineering. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing 16(4), 359–381 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. [PFP+92]
    Patil, R., Fikes, R., Patel-Schneider, P., McKay, D., Finin, T., Gruber, T., Neches, R.: The DARPA Knowledge Sharing Effort: Progress Report. In: Proceedings of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, pp. 777–788 (1992)Google Scholar
  48. [PS06]
    Pazienza, M., Stellato, A.: Linguistic Enrichment of Ontologies: a methodological framework. In: Second Workshop on Interfacing Ontologies and Lexical Resources for Semantic Web Technologies (OntoLex 2006), Italy, May 24-26 (2006)Google Scholar
  49. [Q91]
    Qmair, Y.: Foundations of Arabic philosophy. Dar al-Shoroq, Beirut (1991) ISBN 2-7214-8024-3Google Scholar
  50. [R88]
    Reiter, R.: Towards a Logical Reconstruction of Relational Database Theory. In: Readings in AI and Databases. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1988)Google Scholar
  51. [S03a]
    Smith, B.: Ontology. In: Floridi, L. (ed.) Blackwell Guide to the Philosophy of Computing and Information, pp. 155–166. Blackwell, Oxford (2003)Google Scholar
  52. [S95]
    Shapiro, S.: Propositional, First-Order And Higher-Order Logics: Basic Definitions, Rules of Inference, Examples. In: Iwanska, L., Stuart, S. (eds.) Natural Language Processing and Knowledge Representation: Language for Knowledge and Knowledge for Language. AAAI Press/The MIT Press, Menlo Park (1995)Google Scholar
  53. [T00]
    Temmerman, T.: Towards New Ways of Terminology Description, the sociocognitive approach. John Benjamins Publishing Company, Amsterdam (2000) ISBN 9027223262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. [TV06]
    Trog, D., Vereecken, J.: Context-driven Visualization For Ontology Engineering, p. 237. Computer Science, Brussels (2006)Google Scholar
  55. [SMJ02]
    Spyns, P., Meersman, R., Jarrar, M.: Data modelling versus Ontology engineering. SIGMOD Record 31(4), 12–17 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. [V82]
    Van Griethuysen, J.J. (ed.): Concepts and Terminology for the Conceptual Schema and Information Base. International Standardization Organization, Publication No. ISO/TC97/SC5- N695 (1982)Google Scholar
  57. [VDM04]
    Verheyden, P., De Bo, J., Meersman, R.: Semantically unlocking database content through ontology-based mediation. In: Bussler, C.J., Tannen, V., Fundulaki, I. (eds.) SWDB 2004. LNCS, vol. 3372, pp. 109–126. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. [WG01]
    Welty, C., Guarino, N.: Support for Ontological Analysis of Taxonomic Relationships. Journal of Data and Knowledge Engineering 39(1), 51–74 (2001)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  59. [ZD04]
    Ziegler, P., Dittrich, K.: User-Specific Semantic Integration of Heterogeneous Data: The SIRUP Approach. In: Proceeding of the International Conference on Semantics of a Networked World. LNCS, pp. 14–44. Springer, Paris (2004)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mustafa Jarrar
    • 1
  • Robert Meersman
    • 1
  1. 1.STARLabVrije Universiteit BrusselBelgium

Personalised recommendations