Ontology Repositories

  • Jens HartmannEmail author
  • Raúl Palma
  • Asunción Gómez-Pérez
Part of the International Handbooks on Information Systems book series (INFOSYS)


The growing use and application of ontologies in the last years has led to an increased interest of researchers and practitioners in the development of ontologies, either from scratch or by reusing existing ones. Reusing existing ontologies instead of creating new ones from scratch has many benefits: It lowers the time and cost of development, avoids duplicate efforts, ensures interoperability, etc. In fact, ontology reuse is one of the key enablers for the realization of the Semantic Web. However, currently, ontologies are mostly developed from scratch, due to several reasons. First, ontologies are usually tailored to work for specific applications, restricting its potential reusability. Second, developers usually follow a monolithic approach when developing ontologies, usually covering different domains, hampering the reusability of relevant parts for other applications. Third, ontologies are rather difficult to find due to the lack of standards for documenting them and appropriate tools supporting intelligent ontology discovery and selection by end users. In this chapter, we define a generic ontology repository framework that enables the implementation of fully-fledged ontology repositories providing the technological support to the aforementioned issues. We distinguish between the ontology repository itself and the software to manage the repository, and describe their main aspects and services. Finally, we present two exemplary systems based on this framework.



Research reported in this chapter was partially supported by two European Projects: The Network of Excellence KnowledgeWeb (FP6-507482) and the NeOn Project (FP6-027595).


  1. 1.
    William Y. Arms. Digital Libraries. MIT, Cambridge, MA, 2001.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Jie Bao, Doina Caragea, and Vasant Honavar. Towards collaborative environments for ontology construction and sharing. In International Symposium on Collaborative Technologies and Systems (CTS 2006), pages 99–108. IEEE Press, 2006.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    T. Berners-Lee, J. Hendler, and O. Lassila. The Semantic Web. Scientific American Magazine, 284(5):34–43, 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Alexander Borgida and Luciano Serafini. Distributed description logics: Directed domain correspondences in federated information sources. In OTM Federated Conference CoopIS/DOA/ODBASE, pages 36–53, 2002.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Saartje Brockmans, Robert M. Colomb, Elisa F. Kendall, Evan Wallace, Christopher Welty, Guo Tong Xie, and Peter Haase. A model driven approach for building OWL DL and OWL full ontologies. In Isabel Cruz et al., editor, The Semantic Web – ISWC 2006: 5th International Semantic Web Conference, volume 4273 of LNCS, pages 187–200, Athens, GA, USA, Nov 2006. Springer.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bernardo Cuenca Grau, Ian Horrocks, Yevgeny Kazakov, and Ulrike Sattler. Just the right amount: Extracting modules from ontologies. In Proc. of the Sixteenth International World Wide Web Conference (WWW 2007), 2007.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    M. d’Aquin, M. Sabou, and E. Motta. Modularization: A key for the dynamic selection of relevant knowledge components. In 1st International Workshop on Modular Ontologies (WoMo 2006), co-located with ISWC, 2006.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Y. Ding and D. Fensel. Ontology library systems: The key to successful ontology reuse, 2001. In Proc. 1st Int Semantic Web Working Symposium (SWWS’01), 2001.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bernardo Cuenca Grau, Bijan Parsia, and Evren Sirin. Working with multiple ontologies on the semantic web. In International Semantic Web Conference, pages 620–634, 2004.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ramanathan Guha. Open rating systems. Technical report, Stanford University, CA, USA, 2003.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ramanathan Guha, Ravi Kumar, Prabhakar Raghavan, and Andrew Tomkins. Propagation of trust and distrust. In Proc. of the Thirteenth International World Wide Web Conference, pages 403–412, New York, NY, May 2004. ACM Press.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jens Hartmann. Ontology-based modeling and realization of knowledge management systems. PhD thesis, University of Karlsruhe (TH), Institute AIFB, Karlsruhe, 2007.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jens Hartmann and Raul Palma. OMV – Ontology Metadata Vocabulary for the Semantic Web, 2006. v. 2.0, available at
  14. 14.
    Jens Hartmann and York Sure. An infrastructure for scalable, reliable semantic portals. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 19(3):58–65, 2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jens Hartmann, York Sure, Peter Haase, Raul Palma, Mari Carmen Suárez-Figueroa. OMV – Ontology metadata vocabulary. In Chris Welty, editor, ISWC 2005 – In Ontology Patterns for the Semantic Web, Nov 2005.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jens Hartmann, York Sure, Raul Palma, Peter Haase, Mari Carmen Suárez-Figueroa, Rudi Studer, and Asunción Góomez-Péerez. Ontology metadata vocabulary and applications. In Robert Meersman, editor, International Conference on Ontologies, Databases and Applications of Semantics. In Workshop on Web Semantics (SWWS), Oct 2005.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rachel Heery and Sheila Anderson. Digital repositories review, February 2005.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    William H. Inmon and W. H. Inmon. Building the Data Warehouse, 3rd Edition. Wiley, New York, 2002.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Oliver Kutz, Carsten Lutz, Frank Wolter, and Michael Zakharyaschev. E-connections of description logics. In Description Logics Workshop, CEUR-WS Vol.81, 2003.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Holger Lewen, Kaustubh Supekar, Natalya F. Noy, and Mark A. Musen. Topic-specific trust and open rating systems: an approach for ontology evaluation. In Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Evaluation of Ontologies for the Web (EON2006) at the 15th International World Wide Web Conference (WWW 2006), Edinburgh, UK, May 2006.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Frank Loebe. Requirements for logical modules. In 1st International Workshop on Modular Ontologies (WoMo 2006), co-located with ISWC, 2006.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Alexander Maedche, Boris Motik, and Ljiljana Stojanovic. Managing multiple and distributed ontologies in the Semantic Web. VLDB Journal, 12(4):286–302, 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Natalya F. Noy, Ramanathan Guha, and Mark A. Musen. User ratings of ontologies: Who will rate the raters? In Proc. of the AAAI 2005 Spring Symposium on Knowledge Collection from Volunteer Contributors, Stanford, CA, 2005.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    R. Palma and P. Haase. Oyster – sharing and re-using ontologies in a peer-to-peer community. In International Semantic Web Conference, pages 1059–1062, 2005.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Raul Palma, Peter Haase, Yimin Wang, and Mathieu d’Aquin. D1.3.1 propagation models and strategies. Technical Report D1.3.1, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Nov 2007.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    J. Rumbaugh, M. Blaha, W. Premerlani, F. Eddy, and W. Lorensen. Object-Oriented Modeling and Design. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, 1991.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ljiljana Stojanovic. Methods and tools for ontology evolution. PhD thesis, Universität Karlsruhe (TH), Universität Karlsruhe (TH), Institut AIFB, Karlsruhe, 2004.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Nenad Stojanovic, Jens Hartmann, and Jorge Gonzalez. The OntoManager – a system for usage-based ontology management. In Proceedings of FGML Workshop. Special Interest Group of German Information Society (FGML – Fachgruppe Maschinelles Lernen der GI e.V.), 2003.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Denny Vrandecic and York Sure. How to design better ontology metrics. In Wolfgang May and Michael Kifer, editors, Proceedings of the 4th European Semantic Web Conference (ESWC’07), Innsbruck, Austria, Jun 2007. Springer.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Yimin Wang, Jie Bao, Peter Haase, and Guilin Qi. Evaluating formalisms for modular ontologies in distributed information systems. In Massimo Marchiori and Jeff Z. Pan, editors, Proceedings of The First International Conference on Web Reasoning and Rule Systems (RR2007), LNCS 4524, pages 178–182, Innsbruck, Austria, Jun 2007. Springer.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jens Hartmann
    • 1
    Email author
  • Raúl Palma
    • 2
  • Asunción Gómez-Pérez
    • 3
  1. 1.Center for Computing Technologies (TZI)University of BremenBremenGermany
  2. 2.Ontology Engineering GroupLaboratorio de Inteligencia ArtificialMadridSpain
  3. 3.Facultad de InformáticaUniversidad Politécnica deMadridSpain

Personalised recommendations