BPM2008 sBPM Tutorial

Semantic BPM Tutorial

at BPM 2008Milan, Italy

September 1st, 2008

Presenters • Sami Bhiri (NUIG - DERI Galway,

Ireland)• Sebastian Stein (IDS Scheer,

Germany) • Barry Norton (Open University, UK)• Marin Dimitrov (Ontotext, Bulgaria)

© SUPER 29.09.2008 SUPERBPM 2008, Milan, Italy 2

Acknowledgement & Copyrights

• This material is based upon works supported by the EU under the SUPER project (FP6 - 026850)

• Material Preparation – KMI: John Domingue, Barry Norton– Poznan University: Agata Filipowska– IAAS, University of Stuttgart: Dimka Karastoyanova, Jörg Nitzsche, Tammo van

Lessen, Zhilei Ma, Frank Leymann– IDS Scheer: Sebastian Stein – DERI Austria: Dumitru Roman, Michael Stollberg– DERI Galway: Maciej Zaremba, Sami Bhiri, Armin Haller– Ontotext: Marin Dimitrov

© by the SUPER project consortium


Agenda

1. Introduction: The Need of Semantics in BPM

2. Business Process Management ■ Introduction■ Process Execution with BPEL

3. Semantic Web Services■ Introduction■ SWS Technologies

4. Integration: The SUPER Approach■ SUPER Ontology Stack■ SUPER Architecture

5. SUPER Demonstration

Introduction

Sebastian Stein, IDS Scheer


Querying the Process Space


The Critical IT / Process Divide




What Are My Services?


What Are My Services?


What are my services?


Matching Activities and Port Types Based on Semantics

Semantic Web Services


Supporting Business Users Better


Matching Model Representations & Semantics


Agenda






Business Process ManagementIntroduction



BPM: Introduction

• BPM’s Parents and Definition• Enterprise Model• Business Process Lifecycle• BPM Applications• Summary


BusinessProcess

Management(BPM)

Office Automation(since 1980)

Workflow Systems(since 1985)

CSCW / Groupware /Workgroup Systems

EAI(since 1990)

Business Reengineering(since 1990)

Continuous Improvements(since 1990)

Business Process Modelling(since 1990)

Business Process Mngt.(since 2000)

Business Objects(since 2000)

SOA(since 2000)

BPM’s Parents and Definition


BPM’s Parents and Definition

• there are several competing definitions• own focus coins BPM definition:

– focus on documentation– focus on process and execution– focus on IT architecture– focus on costs and risks– focus on business strategy– etc.

• in SUPER we have a strong process and execution focus


Enterprise Model

• model of an enterprise– internal enterprise architecture– internal requirements– interfaces– business processes– external integration– external requirements– ...

• model is an abstraction of reality

• used by many different stakeholders


Enterprise Model

PurchaseOrder

ReceivedSYS

GetPurchaseOrder

PurchaseOrder

Extracted

SYS

Load ContentContent

Ready forDownload

SYS

Get License LicenseAvailable

SYS

Send Content& License

PurchaseOrder

Satisfied


Enterprise Model

PurchaseOrder

ReceivedSYS

GetPurchaseOrder

Cell Phone

PurchaseOrder

Extracted

SYS

Load ContentContent

Ready forDownload

SYS


SYS


PurchaseOrder

Satisfied

Cell Phone


Enterprise Model

PurchaseOrder

ReceivedSYS

GetPurchaseOrder

Cell Phone

Customer

PurchaseOrder

Extracted

SYS

Load ContentContent

Ready forDownload

SYS


SYS


PurchaseOrder

Satisfied

DigitalContent

Customer License

DigitalContent License

Cell Phone

ContentIdentifier

ContentIdentifier


Enterprise Model

PurchaseOrder

ReceivedSYS

GetPurchaseOrder

Cell Phone

Customer

PurchaseOrder

Extracted

SYS

Load ContentContent

Ready forDownload

SYS


SYS


PurchaseOrder

Satisfied

DigitalContent

Customer License


Cell Phone

Cell PhoneInterfaceService

ContentIdentifier

ContentIdentifier

ContentLibraryService

LicenseService



Enterprise Model

PurchaseOrder

ReceivedSYS

GetPurchaseOrder

Cell Phone

Customer

PurchaseOrder

Extracted

SYS

Load ContentContent

Ready forDownload

SYS


SYS


PurchaseOrder

Satisfied

DigitalContent

Customer License


Cell Phone


ContentProvider

ContentIdentifier

ContentIdentifier

ContentLibraryService

LicenseService

SalesDepartment


IT DepartmentIT Department


Enterprise Model

too complex


Enterprise Model

• possible abstraction layers are:– requirements definition– design specification– implementation specification– execution and run-time models

• possible views are:– organisational view– product view– data view (information architecture)– function and IT view– process view


Enterprise Model

• many different frameworks for enterprise architecture, e.g.:– Zachman Framework (very comprehensive)– ArchiMate (simplified version of Zachman)– ARIS (promoted by IDS Scheer)– TOGAF (strong IT focus)– IAF (promoted by Cap Gemini)

• currently many discussions around process design & execution, e.g.:– BPMN (notation for (IT oriented) business processes)– EPC (notation for business processes)– Petrinets (formalism often used for workflow modelling)– UML Activity diagrams – XPDL (execution language for process definitions)– BPEL (execution language for process definitions)– XLANG (execution language promoted by Microsoft)– ...


Process Lifecycle

• enterprise model evolves lifecycle• based on general Deming cycle for continuous process

improvements• sometimes also named Shewhart cycle

1. Plan2. Do3. Check4. Act


BPM Applications

BusinessProcess

Management(BPM)

define enterprise strategy

business process design

IT management(e.g. ITIL)

enterprise architecture(e.g. Zachman)

quality management

corporate performancemanagement

process automation

application integration

risk management

compliance management

cost control andmanagement

define enterprise vision


Summary

• BPM definition depends on your focus• Enterprise Model describes all relevant aspects of your enterprise• different stakeholders will have different views and information

needs• lifecycle for the different parts of the Enterprise Model• BPM is done for many different purposes, but SUPER focus on:

– business process design– business process execution– monitoring and analysis of execution


Agenda






Business Process ManagementProcesses and Process Execution



BPM Applications

Business Experts’ Perspective: Processes

IT Implementation Perspective

Process Implementation

Querying the Process Space Manual Labor


Dimensions in Web Service Flows

(what) with?

what?

A1

A2

A4

A3

A5

• BPM only incorporates three dimensions– Control Flow– Informational– Operational

• Web services are the only operational entity

• Drawback: no organisational dimension– But efforts exist:

BPEL4People


What is BPEL?

• BPM language/model

• Language to specify behaviour of business processes

• Executable and Abstract processes– Executable processes

– Executed within a compliant environment (portability)

– Abstract processes

– Specify constraints of message exchange

– Provide “views” on internal processes

• Combination of graph‐based language (IBM WSFL) and calculus‐based language (Microsoft XLANG)


BPEL Web Service composition

• BPEL process composes (uses) Web services


Business Processes as Web services

• BPEL Process is also a Web service– functionality in terms of WSDL port types and operations


BPEL Elements

• Partner Links specify– roles of all external partners– role(s) of the process itself

• Variables– used as input‐ and output‐

containers of activities

• Correlation Sets– Maintains the state of a

conversation (instance)

• Handlers– define exception handling and

compensation

• Activities – define the actual control logic

BPEL Process

Partner Links

Variables

Correlation Sets

Handlers

Activities


BPEL partnerLinkTypes

• partnerLinkType is:– Bi‐directional typed connector– A mutual call‐back dependency– Specifies one or two roles; a port type per role– Specifies the messages exchanged between partners

name

PortType

PortTypeIn - & In-out

operations only

role 1 role 2

… I requires from my partner an implementation of this

I provide an implementation of this and…


BPEL Communication

• Elements:– Interaction activities

• Receive, Reply, Invoke, Pick– Complex activities for control flow

• Sequence, Flow, If, While, RepeatUntil, ForEach– Data manipulation

• Assign– Exception handling

• Throw, Rethrow, Fault Handlers, Compensation Handlers– Reaction to Events

• Pick, Event Handlers

• Instantiation is implicit –use <receive> or <pick>


BPEL Control Logic

• Sequential execution sequence

• Parallel execution of tasks Flow, links

• Branching if then else

• Loops while, repeat until

Sequence

Activity

Flow

Link

Loops BranchingCondition1 Condition2

…

Otherwise


Architecture of a BPEL Engine

Process Engine

Deployment Component

Event Manager

Build Time Data (Process models)

Communication Manager

Navigator

Invocation and Management Framework

Instance Data(Process Instances)

ExecutionHistory

Mon

itorin

g AP

I


* Receive may cause an Instantiation of a Process

BPEL Document

BPEL Engine

Process Definition

Execution via the Navigator

Process Instance

...Deployment

Instantiation

Process Lifecycle within the Engine

Invo

catio

n an

d M

anag

e-m

entF

ram

ewor

k

Receive*

Reply


Agenda







Barry Norton


WWWURI, HTML, HTTP

Semantic WebRDF, RDF(S), OWL

Dynamic Web ServicesUDDI, WSDL, SOAP

Static

Semantic WebServices

Semantics for the WWW


• next generation of the Internet (augmentation of the WWW)

• information has machine‐processable and machine‐understandable semantics

• ontologies as base technology for semantic interoperability

RDF OWL XML DBWebAppl.

ontology ontology ontology

semantic bridges

The Semantic Web


Ontology Definition

formal, explicit specification of a shared conceptualization

commonly accepted understanding

conceptual model of a domain

(ontological theory)

unambiguous terminology definitions

machine-readability with computational

semantics


Concept conceptual entity of the domain

Propertyattribute describing a concept

Relationrelationship between concepts or properties

Axiom coherency description between Concepts / Properties / Relations via logical expressions

Instanceindividual in the domain

Person

Student Professor

Lecture

isA – hierarchy (taxonomy)

name email

studentID

researchfield

topiclectureno.

attends holds

holds(Professor, Lecture) =>Lecture.topic = Professor.researchField

Ann memberOf student name = Ann Lee studentID = 12345

Ontology Example


Web Services & SOA

• Web Service = program accessible over the Web

• Service‐Oriented Architecture (SOA): – use Web services as basic building blocks

– dynamically find & invoke those Web services

that allow to solve a particular request

• Web Service Technologies: 1. WSDL Web Service Description Language

2. SOAP XML data exchange protocol for the Web

3. UDDI registry for Web Services


The Web Service Usage Process

Repository

ConsumerWeb

Service

WSDL

SOAP

find usable Web Service

WS usage via message exchange

points to

describes


• current technologies allow usage of Web Services• but:

– only syntactical information descriptions – syntactic support for discovery, composition and execution=> Web Service usability, usage, and integration needs to be inspected

manually – no semantically marked up content / services– no support for the Semantic Web

=> initial Web Service Technology Stack failed to realize the SOA Vision

Deficiencies of WS Technology



• automate Web Service technologies by 1. rich, formal annotation of Web Services

2. automated detection and execution of Web services

• integration with the Semantic Web – ontologies as data model – Web Services as integral part of the WWW

• inference‐based techniques for automated discovery, composition, mediation, execution of Web Services


Web ServiceImplementation(not of interest in Web Service Description)

Interface

Functionality

WS

WS

Non-functional

WS

Aggregation


Ontology Ontology

XML

Ontology

Interface

a) Web Service Description Structure b) Semantic Web Service Description Structure



• Comprehensive Framework for SESASemantically Enabled Service‐Oriented Architecture

– top level notions = SESA core elements

– conceptual model + axiomatization

– ontology & rule language

• International Consortium (mostly European) – started in 2004

– 78 members from 20 organizations

– W3C member submission in April 2005

www.wsmo.org

Web Service Modeling Ontology (WSMO)

http://www.wsmo.org/


WSMO Framework & Working Groups

Conceptual Model & Axiomatization for SWS

Formal Language for WSMO

Ontology & Rule Language for the Semantic Web

Execution Environment for WSMO

www.wsmo.org


Objectives that a client may havewhen consulting a Web Service

Provide the formallyspecified terminologyof the information usedby all other components

Semantic description of WebServices: - Capability (functional)- Interfaces (usage)

Connectors between components withmediation facilities for handling heterogeneities

WSMO Top‐level Elements

(http://www.wsmo.org)



• Ontologies are the ‘data model’ throughout WSMO– all WSMO element descriptions rely on ontologies – all data interchanged in Web Service usage are ontologies – Semantic information processing & ontology reasoning

• WSMO Ontology Language WSML– conceptual syntax for describing WSMO elements – logical language for axiomatic expressions (WSML Layering)

• WSMO Ontology Design– Modularization: import / re‐using ontologies, modular approach

for ontology design – De‐Coupling: heterogeneity handled by OO Mediators

WSMO Ontologies


• Non functional properties author, date, ID, etc.

• Imported Ontologies importing existing ontologies where no heterogeneities arise

• Used mediators OO Mediators (ontology import with terminology mismatch handling)

Ontology Elements:Concepts set of entities that exists in the world / domain

Attributes set of attributes that belong to a concept

Relations define interrelations between several concepts

Functions special type of relation (unary range = return value)

Instances set of instances that belong to the represented ontology

Axioms axiomatic expressions in ontology (logical statement)

Ontology Specification


The Web Service Modelling Language (WSML)

• Ontology / Rule Languages– WSML Core: efficiency and compatibility

– WSML DL: decidability, open world semantics

– WSML Rule: efficient existing rule engines

– WSML Full: unifying language, theorem proving

• Languages for dynamics

– Transaction Logic over ASMs

• Mapping languages– for dynamics (process mediation)

– for data (data mediation)

URIUnicode

XML

RDF (S)WSML Core

WSML DLWSML Rule

WSML Full

Static Aspects

Dynamic Aspects

WSML


WSMO/WSML – Some Modelling Examples

■ Concept exampleconcept phoneNumber

nonFunctionalPropertiesdc#description hasValue "concept of a

phone number"endNonFunctionalPropertiescountryCode ofType _stringareaCode ofType _stringnumber ofType _string

• Relation examplerelation hasRoute(ofType routeDescription, ofType route)

nonFunctionalPropertiesdc#description hasValue "Relation that holds between

a route description and a route"endNonFunctionalProperties

■ Axiom exampleaxiom ValidInformationQuality

definedByforall {?x} (

?x memberOf informationQualityTypeimplies

?x[value hasValue “low“] or?x[value hasValue “high“]).

■ Instance exampleinstance myPhoneNumber memberOf phoneNumber

countryCode hasValue “43“areaCode hasValue “664“number hasValue “49322607“

■ Sub-concept exampleconcept mobilePhoneNumber subConceptOf

phoneNumbernonFunctionalProperties

dc#description hasValue "concept of a mobile phone number"

endNonFunctionalPropertiesmobileProvider ofType Provider



Capability

functional description

WS

WS

- Advertising of Web Service- Support for WS Discovery

client-service interaction interface for consuming WS - external visible

behavior- communication

structure - ‘grounding’

realization of functionality by aggregation- functional

decomposition - WS composition

Non-functional Properties

DC + QoS + Version + financial

- complete item description- quality aspects - Web Service Management

WS

Orchestration

WSMO Web Service Description

Interface


Web Service Description ‐ Example

webService _"https://asg-platform.org/AttractionBooking/MobtelPhoneLocationService"nfp

dc#title hasValue "MobtelPhoneLocationService"dc#publisher hasValue "Mobtel“dO#informQualityType hasValue "high"

endnfpimportsOntology _"https://asg-platform.org/AttractionBooking/domainOntology.wsml"capability MobtelPhoneLocationServiceCapability

sharedVariables {?P}precondition

definedBy?P memberOf dO#phoneNumber.

postconditiondefinedBy

?L memberOf dO#locationand

dO#hasLocation(?P,?L).interface MobtelPhoneLocationServiceInterface

choreography MobtelPhoneLocationServiceChoreographystateSignature

indO#phoneNumber withGrounding

ssWSDL#wsdl.interfaceMessageReference(MobtelPhoneLocationServicePortType/doIt/In)out

dO#location withGroundingssWSDL#wsdl.interfaceMessageReference(MobtelPhoneLocationServicePortType/doIt/Out)

transitionRulesforAll{?P} with (?P memberOf dO#phoneNumber) do

add(?L memberOf dO#location and dO#hasLocation(?P,?L))endForall


WSMO Goals – Purpose

client-system interaction

discovery, composition, mediation

Client objective / problem to be solved

Goalsformal objective description

Semantics / SWSOntology SWS description

Mediator

Web Services & Resources

WS Internet

execution

End

Start

Web Service

GoalGoal Web Service

Web Service

End

Abstraction Layer for Problem-oriented WS usage Dynamic WS usage


Goal Templates and Goal Instances

Client

Goal Templategeneric objective description

Goal Instanceconcrete input

instantiates

defines

(Web) ServiceImplementation

(not of interest here)

functional

behavioral

service detection

Client-Side Service-Side

Domain Knowledge Ontology OntologyOntology Ontology

service usage


Automated Web Service Usage

Client

Goal

buy train ticket in Germany- origion: o, destination: d- date-time: dt

client interface

goal instance with inputs: o = Munich, d = Berlindt = 20070319-1030

defines

instantiates

design time

runtime

executes

DB Ticketing

Mediator


SWS Techniques

• Discoveryfind candidate WS to solve a Goal

• Selection & Ranking select best candidate / determine a priority list

• Compositioncombine several WS to solve a Goal

• Behavioral Compatibilityensure that interaction can take place

• Mediationresolve & handle possibly occurring heterogeneities

• Executionautomatically invoke & consume WS to solve a Goal


Automated Goal Solving with SWS

GOAL

Discoverer

BehavioralConformance

Data Mediator

ProcessMediator

Executor

if: usableif: composition possible

uses

composition (executable)

matchmaking R with all WS

uses

submission

if: compatible

if: successful

if: executionerror

information lookup for particular service

else: not solvable

Service Repository

uses

Selection &Ranking

Composer

else: try other WS


WSMO Reference Implementation

WSMX ‐ The Web Service Execution Environment

• A Service Oriented Architecture

• Reference implementation of SESA and WSMO

• open source (LGPL): http://sourceforge.net/projects/wsmx/

http://sourceforge.net/projects/wsmx/


WSMX Design & Properties

• Middleware for Semantic Web Services– Allow service providers focus on their business

• Environment for goal‐based Web service usage– Run‐time binding of service requester and provider

• Flexible Service Oriented Architecture– Add, update, remove components at run‐time as needed

• Open‐source to encourage participation– Developers are free to use in their own code

• Formal execution semantics– Unambiguous model of system behaviour


Other WSMO Toolswww.wsmo.org/tools

• WSML (Specification Language) www.wsmo.org/wsml– conceptual language for WSMO

– ontology language with several variants

• WSMO Editors: – WSML editors + validation

– WSMO Studio

– WSMO Visualizer

• Ontology Technology: – WSML Reasoner (for DL and LP)

– Ontology Management Suite

– Data Mediator (incl. Abstract Mapping Language)

all: Eclipse plugins & open source (LGPL licence)

http://www.wsmo.org/tools

http://www.wsmo.org/wsml


Agenda






Integration - SUPER Approach

Sami Bhiri




SUPER Main Approach


Solution mapsMind mapsAd-hoc modelling techniques...

Making sense of a domain\problemCommunication toolWhat is it all about?

Visualizing\specifying business processFocus: Business ProblemWho does what, when, how and why?Usually multiple layers

Business Scenario MapsEvent-driven process chainsFlowchart techniquesBPMN...Plane

ticketService PlaneticketPlaneticketService

Alternativeflightoffer

ServiceAlternative

flightoffer

Alternativeflightoffer

ServiceBookingrequestService BookingrequestBookingrequestService

BookingformService Bookingform

BookingformService

Receiptbookingrequest

Receiptbookingrequest

Checkbookingrequest

Checkbookingrequest

Bookingrequestchecked

Bookingrequestchecked

Callcenter

Callcenter

Flightdisposition

Flightdisposition

Flightdisposition

Flightdisposition

Offeralternative

flight

Offeralternative

flight

Createflight

booking

Createflight

booking

Flightbookingcreated

Flightbookingcreated

Alternativeflight

offered

Alternativeflight

offered

Flight dataFlight data

Client dataClient data

Mrs. MillerMrs. Miller

Mrs. WalkerMrs. Walker Mr. GreenMr. Green

<process name="Mediation Example - Ordering BPEL Snippet - 1" suppressJoinFailure="yes" targetNamespace="..."><sequence>

<receive name="Initial_Receive" createInstance="true"/><invoke name="Invoke_Check_Order_Consistency"/><switch>

<case condition="bpws:getVariableData('consistency', '') = 'OK'"><flow>

<invoke name="Invoke_Update_Provisioning_Systems_Subprocess"/><invoke name="Invoke_CustomerReply_Confirmation_Note"/>

</flow></case><otherwise>

<invoke name="Invoke_CustomerReply_Rejection_Note"/></otherwise>

</switch><reply name="Final_Reply"/>

</sequence></process>

Process execution specificationFormal, clearly specified grammarFocus: ImplementationWhich component is called when, how, by whom with which data?

BPEL...

Web service encapsulationFocus: ImplementationWhich components can and should be exposed how as services?

WS*...

Implementation of components Programming languages...

Modelling Stack


Value add of Super

Use of semantics allows us to cross business process representational boundaries


SUPER Methodology Framework

Semantic Business Process

Analysis


Execution


Configuration

Strategic Semantic Business Process Management

Ontological Foundation


Modelling


SBP ModellingText

Text


Modelling


SBP Configuration


SBP Execution


SBP Analysis


Agenda






Integration - SUPER ApproachSUPER Ontology Stack

Barry Norton


ImportsMaps to

Pre-existing ontologies

SUPER ontologies

sEPC Ontology sBPMN Ontology

BusinessDomain

OntologiesBusiness Process

Modelling Ontology (BPMO)

WSMO OntologyUpper-Level Process

Ontology (UPO)

sBPEL Ontology

Process Mining Ontology (PMO)

Events Ontology (EVO)

Domain ontologies

Translates to

Behavioural Reasoning Ontology


ImportsMaps to


SUPER ontologies


BusinessDomain




Ontology (UPO)

sBPEL Ontology



Domain ontologies

Translates to



ImportsMaps to


SUPER ontologies


BusinessDomain




Ontology (UPO)

sBPEL Ontology



Domain ontologies

Translates to



ImportsMaps to


SUPER ontologies


BusinessDomain




Ontology (UPO)

sBPEL Ontology



Domain ontologies

Translates to



Business Domain Ontologies

• Business Functions Ontology– describes functions carried out within the company

(e.g. marketing, finance, HR) • Business Process Resources Ontology

– describes tangible and abstract resources required• Business Roles Ontology

– roles in the organisation (e.g. Designer, Process Modeller, IT Expert, CEO)

• Business Modelling Guidelines Ontology– generic business policies and rules for domains like

law, finance, etc.


ImportsMaps to


SUPER ontologies


BusinessDomain




Ontology (UPO)

sBPEL Ontology



Domain ontologies

Translates to



sEPC


ImportsMaps to


SUPER ontologies


BusinessDomain




Ontology (UPO)

sBPEL Ontology



Domain ontologies

Translates to



sBPMN


ImportsMaps to


SUPER ontologies


BusinessDomain




Ontology (UPO)

sBPEL Ontology



Domain ontologies

Translates to



BPMO


BPMO


BPMO


ImportsMaps to


SUPER ontologies


BusinessDomain




Ontology (UPO)

sBPEL Ontology



Domain ontologies

Translates to



ImportsMaps to


SUPER ontologies


BusinessDomain




Ontology (UPO)

sBPEL Ontology



Domain ontologies

Translates to



sBPEL ontology

• Takes the Business Process Execution Language (BPEL 2.0) as a basis

• Extends BPEL to support SWS concepts– Ontological concepts as data model– Logical expressions in conditions– Capability based invocation via WSMO Goals– Mediators to perform data transformation within a process

• Can be serialized to BPEL4SWS (XML) to be executed in extended BPEL engines


sBPEL


ImportsMaps to


SUPER ontologies


BusinessDomain




Ontology (UPO)

sBPEL Ontology



Domain ontologies

Translates to



EVO


ImportsMaps to


SUPER ontologies


BusinessDomain




Ontology (UPO)

sBPEL Ontology



Domain ontologies

Translates to



PMO


Agenda






Integration - SUPER ApproachSUPER Architecture

Sami Bhiri


SemanticBPEL

ExecutionEngine

SBPComposition

SemanticExecution

Environment

ModellingTool

Monitoring & Management

ToolAnalysis Tool

SUPER Execution SUPER Tooling

SBP ProcessMediation

SBP Discovery Data Mediation

SBP Reasoner Transformation

SUPER Platform Services

SUPER Repositories

Deployment

Event Sink

Protocol Binder

Business Process Library


Repository

ExecutionHistory

Semantic Service Bus

Architecture: Structural Overview


SemanticBPEL

ExecutionEngine

SBPComposition

SemanticExecution

Environment

SUPER Execution





SUPER Repositories

Deployment

Event Sink

Protocol Binder



Repository

ExecutionHistory


ModellingTool


ToolAnalysis Tool

SUPER Tooling

Architecture: Tools


SBPComposition

ModellingTool


ToolAnalysis Tool

SUPER Tooling





SUPER Repositories

Deployment

Event Sink

Protocol Binder



Repository

ExecutionHistory


SemanticBPEL

ExecutionEngine

SemanticExecution

Environment

SUPER Execution

Architecture: Execution Environment


SemanticBPEL

ExecutionEngine

SemanticExecution

Environment

ModellingTool


ToolAnalysis Tool


SUPER Repositories

Deployment

Event Sink

Protocol Binder



Repository

ExecutionHistory


SBPComposition





Architecture: Platform Services


SemanticBPEL

ExecutionEngine

SBPComposition

SemanticExecution

Environment

ModellingTool


ToolAnalysis Tool






Deployment

Event Sink

Protocol Binder


SUPER Repositories



Repository

ExecutionHistory

Architecture: Repositories


SemanticBPEL

ExecutionEngine

SBPComposition

SemanticExecution

Environment

ModellingTool


ToolAnalysis Tool






SUPER Repositories



Repository

ExecutionHistory

Deployment

Event Sink

Protocol Binder


Architecture: Semantic Service Bus


BPEL4SWS

WSDL

Deploymentdescriptor

WSMO Mediators

WSMOGoals

WSMOWSDLSemantic Process

Artefacts Bundle(SPAB)

Architecture Behavioural Perspective: SBP Deployment


SemanticBPEL

ExecutionEngine

SemanticExecution

Environment

ModellingTool

SUPER Execution

SUPER Repositories

Deployment



Repository

ExecutionHistory


BPEL4SWS WSDL DeploymentDescriptor

WSMOMediators

S P A B

WSMOGoals

Architecture Behavioural Perspective: SBP Deployment

WSMOWSDL


Data Mediation


SUPER Repositories



Repository

ExecutionHistory

Architecture Behavioural Perspective: SBP Execution

SemanticExecution

Environment

1 Execute Task

SemanticBPEL

ExecutionEngine

SBP Reasoner

Protocol Binder

Web Service

Event Sink

SUPER Execution


Data Mediation


SUPER Repositories



Repository

ExecutionHistory


SemanticExecution

Environment

1 Execute Task

2

SemanticBPEL

ExecutionEngine

SBP Reasoner

Protocol Binder

Discover and Select Service

Web Service

Event Sink

SUPER Execution


Data Mediation


SUPER Repositories



Repository

ExecutionHistory


SemanticExecution

Environment

1 Execute Task

2

SemanticBPEL

ExecutionEngine

SBP Reasoner

3 MediateData

Protocol Binder


Web Service

Event Sink

SUPER Execution


Data Mediation


SUPER Repositories



Repository

ExecutionHistory


SemanticExecution

Environment

4 Invoke Service

1 Execute Task

2

SemanticBPEL

ExecutionEngine

SBP Reasoner

3 MediateData

Protocol Binder


Web Service

Event Sink

SUPER Execution


Data Mediation


SUPER Repositories



Repository

ExecutionHistory


SemanticExecution

Environment

4 Invoke Service

1 Execute Task

2

SemanticBPEL

ExecutionEngine

SBP Reasoner

3/5 MediateData

Protocol Binder


Web Service

Event Sink

SUPER Execution


Data Mediation


SUPER Repositories



Repository

ExecutionHistory


SemanticExecution

Environment

4 Invoke Service

1 Execute Task

2

6

SemanticBPEL

ExecutionEngine

SBP Reasoner

3/5 MediateData

Return Result

Protocol Binder


Web Service

Event Sink

SUPER Execution


Data Mediation


SUPER Repositories



Repository

ExecutionHistory


SemanticExecution

Environment

4 Invoke Service

1 Execute Task

2

6

SemanticBPEL

ExecutionEngine

SBP Reasoner

3/5 MediateData

Return Result

Protocol Binder


Web Service

Event Sink

SUPER Execution

Generate Events


Agenda






SUPER Demonstration

Martin Dimitrov

References


References BPM Foundations

[Herzum and Sims 2000] Herzum, P.; Sims, O. (2000): Business Component Factory. John Wiley & Sons.

[McGovern et al. 2006] McGovern, J.; Sims, O.; Jain, A.; Little, M. (2006): Enterprise Service Oriented Architectures. Springer, Dordrecht, Netherlands.

[Scheer et al. 2005] Scheer, A.-W.; Thomas, O.; Adam, O. (2005): Process modelling using event-driven process chains. In: Dumas, M.; van der Aalst, W. M. P.; ter Hofstede, A. H. M. (Eds.): Process-Aware Information Systems. Wiley, Hoboken, New Jersey, USA, pp. 119–146.

[Smith and Fingar 2003] Smith, H.; Fingar, P. (2003): Business Process Management: The Third Wave. Meghan-Kiffer Press, Tampa, FL, USA, 1st edition.

[Specht et al, 2005] T. Specht, J. Drawehn, M. Thränert, and S. Kühne. Modeling cooperativebusiness processes and transformation to a service oriented architecture. In 7th International IEEE Conference on E-Commerce Technology, 2005.

[Teboul 2006] Teboul, J. (2006): Service Is Front Stage: Positioning Services for Value Advantage. Palgrave Macmillan, New York, USA.


References BPEL & BPM Technologies

[BEPL 1.1] Andrews, T.; Curbera, F.; Dholakia, H.; Goland, Y.; Klein, J.; Leymann, F.; Liu, K.; Roller, D.; Smith, D.; Thatte, S.; Trickovic, I.; Weerawarana S.: Business Process Execution Language for Web Services (BPEL4WS) 1.1. Technical Report, OASIS, 2003.

[OASIS SOA] MacKenzie, C. M.; Laskey, K.; McCabe, F.; Brown, P. F.; Metz, R. : Reference Model for Service Oriented Architecture 1.0. Technical Report, OASIS. 2006.

[Aalst et al., 2003] Wil M. P. van der Aalst, A. H. M. ter Hofstede, B. Kiepuszewski, and A. P. Barros: Workflow Patterns. In Distributed and Parallel Databases, 14(3):5–51, July 2003.

[Mendling and Nüttgens, 2006] J. Mendling and M. Nüttgens. EPC Markup Language (EPML) - an xml-basedinterchange format for event-driven process chains (EPC). In International Journal Information Systems and e-Business Management (ISeB), 4(3):245–263, July 2006.

[Wohed et al, 2002] P. Wohed, Wil M. P. van der Aalst, M. Dumas, and A. H. M. ter Hofstede. Pattern-based analysis of BPEL4WS. Technical Report FIT-TR-2002-04, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia, 2002.

[Kopp et al, 2006] Oliver Kopp, Tobias Unger, and Frank Leymann. Nautilus event-driven process chains: Syntax, semantics, and their mapping to bpel. In Proceedings of the 5th GI Workshop on Event-Driven Process Chains (EPK 2006), pages 85–104, Vienna, Austria, 2006.

[Manddell and McIllraith, 2003] Daniel J. Mandell and Sheila A. McIlraith. Adapting BPEL4WS for the Semantic Web: The Bottom-Up Approach to Web Service Interoperation. In Proceedings of the Second International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC2003),


References SWS Foundations

[Alonso et al., 2004] Alonso, G., Casati, F., Kuno, H., and Machiraju, V. (2004). Web Services: Concepts, Architectures and Applications. Data-Centric Systems and Applications. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.

[Berners-Lee, 1999] Berners-Lee, T. (1999). Weaving the Web. Harper, San Francisco, USA.

[Berners-Lee et al., 2001] Berners-Lee, T., Hendler, J., and Lassila, O. (2001). The Semantic Web. Scientific American, 284(5):34-43.

[Bussler, 2003] Bussler, C. (2003). B2B Integration: Concepts and Architecture. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.

[Fensel, 2003] Fensel, D. (2003). Ontologies: A Silver Bullet for Knowledge Management and E-Commerce. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2 edition.

[Fensel et al., 2006] Fensel, D. et al: Enabling Semantic Web Services. The Web Service Modeling Ontology WSMO. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2006.

[Goméz-Pérez et al., 2003] Goméz-Pérez, A., Corcho, O., and Fernandez-Lopez, M. (2003). Ontological Engineering. With Examples from the Areas of Knowledge Management, E-Commerce and Semantic Web. Series of Advanced Information and Knowledge Processing. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.

[Gruber, 1993] Gruber, T. R. (1993). A translation approach to portable ontology specifications. Knowledge Acquisition, 5:199-220.


[de Bruijn et al., 2006] de Bruijn, J., Fensel, D., Lausen, H., Polleres, A., Roman, D., and Stollberg, M. (2006). Enabling Semantic Web Services. The Web Service Modeling Ontology. Springer.

[Fensel and Bussler, 2002] Fensel, D. and Bussler, C. (2002). The Web Service Modeling Framework WSMF. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 1(2).

[McIlraith et al., 2001] McIlraith, S., Cao Son, T., and Zeng, H. (2001). Semantic Web Services. IEEE Intelligent Systems, Special Issue on the Semantic Web, 16(2):46-53.

[Preist, 2004] Preist, C. (2004). A Conceptual Architecture for Semantic Web Services. In Proc. of the Int. Semantic Web Conf. (ISWC 2004).

[Roman et al., 2005] 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. Applied Ontology, 1(1):77-106.

[Stollberg et al., 2006] Stollberg, M., Feier, C., Roman, D., and Fensel, D. (2006). Semantic Web Services -Concepts and Technology. In Ide, N., Cristea, D., and Tufis, D. (editors), Language Technology, Ontologies, and the Semantic Web. Kluwer Publishers.

[Sycara et al. 2003] Katia Sycara, Massimo Paolucci, Anupriya Ankolekar and Naveen Srinivasan, "Automated Discovery, Interaction and Composition of Semantic Web services," Journal of Web Semantics, Volume 1, Issue 1, September 2003, pp. 27-46

References Semantic Web Services


OWL-S [Martin, 2004] Martin, D. (2004). OWL-S: Semantic Markup for Web Services. W3C Member

Submission 22 November 2004. online: http://www.w3.org/Submission/OWL-S/.

WSMO [see also www.wsmo.org] [Lausen et al., 2005] Lausen, H., Polleres, A., and Roman (eds.), D. (2005). Web Service

Modeling Ontology (WSMO). W3C Member Submission 3 June 2005. online: http://www.w3.org/Submission/WSMO/.

SWSF [Battle et al., 2005] Battle, S., Bernstein, A., Boley, H., Grosof, B., Gruninger, M., Hull, R., Kifer,

M., D., M., S., M., McGuinness, D., Su, J., and Tabet, S. (2005). Semantic Web Services Framework (SWSF). W3C Member Submission 9 September 2005. online: http://www.w3.org/Submission/SWSF/.

WSDL-S [Akkiraju et al., 2005] Akkiraju, R., Farrell, J., Miller, J., Nagarajan, M., Schmidt, M.- T., Sheth, A.,

and Verma, K. (2005). Web Service Semantics - WSDL-S. W3C Member Submission 7 November 2005. online: http://www.w3.org/Submission/WSDL-S/.

References SWS: W3C Submissions

http://www.w3.org/Submission/OWL-S/


http://www.w3.org/Submission/WSMO/

http://www.w3.org/Submission/SWSF/

http://www.w3.org/Submission/WSDL-S/


References Discovery

Stollberg, M. Stollberg, M.; Keller, U.; Lausen, H. and Heymans, S.: Two-phase Web Service Discovery based on Rich Functional Descriptions. In Proc. of the 4th European Semantic Web Conference (ESWC 2007), Innsbruck, Austria.

B. Benatallah, M. Hacid, C. Rey, F. Toumani Towards Semantic Reasoning for Web Services Discovery,. In Proc. of the International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC 2003), 2003

Keller, U.; Lara, R.; Lausen, H.; Polleres, A.; Fensel, D.: Automatic Location of Services. In Proc. of the 2nd European Semantic Web Symposium (ESWS2005), Heraklion, Crete, 2005.

M. Kifer, R. Lara, A. Polleres, C. Zhao, U. Keller, H. Lausen and D. Fensel: A Logical Framework for Web Service Discovery. Proc. 1st. Intl. Workshop SWS'2004 at ISWC 2004,Hiroshima, Japan, November 8, 2004, CEUR Workshop Proceedings, ISSN 1613-0073

Lei Li and Ian Horrocks. A software framework for matchmaking based on semantic web technology. In Proc. of the Twelfth International World Wide Web Conference (WWW 2003), 2003.

Massimo Paolucci, Takahiro Kawamura, Terry R. Payne, Katia Sycara; Semantic Matching of Web Services Capabilities. In Proceedings of the 1st International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC2002), 2002

Preist, C.: A Conceptual Architecture for Semantic Web Services. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC 2004), 2004, pp. 395 - 409.


[Berardi et al., 2003] Berardi, D., Calvanese, D., Giacomo, G. D., Lenzerini, M., and Mecella, M. (2003). Automatic Composition of e-Services that Export their Behavior. In Proc. of First Int. Conference on Service Oriented Computing (ICSOC).

[Martens, 2003] Martens, A. (2003). On Compatibility of Web Services. Petri Net Newletter, 65:12-20.

[Sirin et al., 2004] Sirin, E., Parsia, B., Wu, D., Hendler, J., and Nau, D. (2004). HTN Planning for Web Service Composition Using SHOP2. Journal of Web Semantics, 1(4):377-396.

[Pistore and Traverso, 2006] Pistore, M. and Traverso, P. (2006). Theoretical Integration of Discovery and Composition. Deliverable D2.4.6, Knowledge Web.

[Stollberg, 2005] Stollberg, M. (2005). Reasoning Tasks and Mediation on Choreography and Orchestration in WSMO. In Proceedings of the 2nd International WSMO Implementation Workshop (WIW 2005), Innsbruck, Austria.

[Traverso and Pistore, 2004] Traverso, P. and Pistore, M. (2004). Automatic Composition of Semantic Web Services into Executable Processes. In Proc. 3rd International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC 2004), Hiroshima, Japan.

References Composition


[Cimpian and Mocan, 2005] Cimpian, E. and Mocan, A. (2005). WSMX Process Mediation Based on Choreographies. In Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Web Service Choreography and Orchestration for Business Process Management at the BPM 2005, Nancy, France.

[Mocan (ed.), 2005] Mocan (ed.), A. (2005). WSMX Data Mediation. WSMX Working Draft D13.3. available at: http://www.wsmo.org/TR/d13/d13.3/v0.2/.

[Mocan et al., 2005] Mocan, A., Cimpian, E., Stollberg, M., Scharffe, F., and Scicluna, J. (2005). WSMO Mediators. WSMO deliverable D29 ¯nal draft 21 Dec 2005. available at: http://www.wsmo.org/TR/d29/.

[Scharffe and de Bruijn, 2005] Scharffe, F. and de Bruijn, J. (2005). A language to specify mappings between ontologies. In Proc. of the Internet Based Systems IEEE Conference (SITIS05).

[Stollberg et al., 2006] Stollberg, M., Cimpian, E., Mocan, A., and Fensel, D. (2006). A Semantic Web Mediation Architecture. In Proceedings of the 1st Canadian Semantic Web Working Symposium (CSWWS 2006), Quebec, Canada.

[Wiederhold, 1994] Wiederhold, G. (1994). Mediators in the Architecture of the Future Information Systems. Computer, 25(3):38-49.

References Mediation


References WSMO

• The central location where WSMO work and papers can be found is WSMO Working Group: http://www.wsmo.org

• WSMO languages – WSML Working Group: http://www.wsml.org

• WSMO implementation – WSMX working group : http://www.wsmx.org– WSMX open source can be found at:

https://sourceforge.net/projects/wsmx/


http://www.wsml.org/

http://www.wsmx.org/

https://sourceforge.net/projects/wsmx/


References IRS III

J. Domingue, L. Cabral, F. Hakimpour, D. Sell and E. Motta: IRS-III: A Platform and Infrastructure for Creating WSMO-based Semantic Web Services. Proceedings of the Workshop on WSMOImplementations (WIW 2004) Frankfurt, Germany, September 29-30, 2004, CEUR Workshop Proceedings, ISSN 1613-0073, online http://CEUR-WS.org/Vol-113/paper3.pdf.

J. Domingue and S. Galizia: Towards a Choreography for IRS-III.Proceedings of the Workshop on WSMO Implementations (WIW 2004) Frankfurt, Germany, September 29-30, 2004, CEUR Workshop Proceedings, ISSN 1613-0073, online http://CEUR-WS.org/Vol-113/paper7.pdf.

Cabral, L., Domingue, J., Motta, E., Payne, T. and Hakimpour, F. (2004).Approaches to Semantic Web Services: An Overview and Comparisons. In proceedings of the First European Semantic Web Symposium (ESWS2004);10-12 May 2004, Heraklion, Crete, Greece.

Motta, E., Domingue, J., Cabral, L. and Gaspari, M. (2003) IRS-II: A Framework and Infrastructure for Semantic Web Services. In proceedings of the 2nd International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC2003) 20-23 October 2003, Sundial Resort, Sanibel Island, Florida, USA.

These papers and software downloads can be found at: http://kmi.open.ac.uk/projects/irs

http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-113/paper3.pdf




Documents

BPM2008 sBPM Tutorial