JANUARY 30, 2015 | SLIDE 1
www.realdolmen.com
MEANINGful SOA
Achieving Dynamic Automation and Runtime Agility
JANUARY 30, 2015 | SLIDE 2
AGENDA
 Background
 Defining MEANINGful SOA
 Business Case for MEANINGful SOA
 Tools
 Clar...
JANUARY 30, 2015 | SLIDE 3
BACKGROUND
 Many organisations adopt the Service Orientation
Paradigm
 Enhance the efficiency...
JANUARY 30, 2015 | SLIDE 4
 Syntactic interoperability
 Ability for multiple software components to interact regardless ...
JANUARY 30, 2015 | SLIDE 5
DIFFERENT NOTIONS OF INTRINSIC INTEROPERABILITY (2)
 Semantic Interoperability
 Related to th...
JANUARY 30, 2015 | SLIDE 6
CAN WE GO FURTHER?
 Yes...
 We are still integrating using SOA design patterns
(Intrinsic Int...
JANUARY 30, 2015 | SLIDE 7
JANUARY 30, 2015 | SLIDE 8
SEMANTICS TO THE RESCUE?
 If services published their meaning and could interpret
message mean...
JANUARY 30, 2015 | SLIDE 9
CAPTURING MEANING
 Relationships among entities declared in classes
 Information about classe...
JANUARY 30, 2015 | SLIDE 10
MEANINGFUL SOA
 Combination of Semantic Web and Service Orientation
Principles
 Adopting sta...
JANUARY 30, 2015 | SLIDE 11
OWL-S SERVICE INTERACTION
(4) Select Service
(5) Construct and issue request
(6) Execute Servi...
JANUARY 30, 2015 | SLIDE 12
OWL-S MATCHMAKING
 A provider publishes services using an advertisement
defined by an OWL-S c...
JANUARY 30, 2015 | SLIDE 13
SERVICE ONTOLOGY
 OWL-S is organized in three modules
Source : OWL-S: Semantic Markup for Web...
JANUARY 30, 2015 | SLIDE 14
SERVICE PROFILE
Source : OWL-S: Semantic Markup for Web Services - http://www.daml.org/service...
JANUARY 30, 2015 | SLIDE 15
SERVICE MODEL
Source : OWL-S: Semantic Markup for Web Services - http://www.daml.org/services/...
JANUARY 30, 2015 | SLIDE 16
SERVICE GROUNDING
Source : OWL-S: Semantic Markup for Web Services - http://www.daml.org/servi...
JANUARY 30, 2015 | SLIDE 17
BUSINESS CASE FOR MEANINGFUL SOA
 Tactically Applied
 Data Integration
 Data Warehousing an...
JANUARY 30, 2015 | SLIDE 18
TOOLS
 Semantic solutions have been adopted by niche
vendors
 Collibra (http://www.collibra....
JANUARY 30, 2015 | SLIDE 19
CLARIFYING THE THEORY
JANUARY 30, 2015 | SLIDE 20
JANUARY 30, 2015 | SLIDE 21
THANK YOU
johan.kumps@realdolmen.com
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Meaningful SOA (Berlin SOA/Cloud Symposium 2010)

953 views

Published on

Meaningful SOA (Berlin SOA/Cloud Symposium 2010) by Johan Kumps (SOA Architect at RealDolmen) - http://soasymposium.com/p2010_johan_kumps.php

Published in: Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
953
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
17
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Focus : data exchange as a bunch of bytes


  • Big effort to build transformation logic
    Negative impact on service composition performance
  • Syntax changed between a real pipe and a painted one. But the meaning of what we see stays the same.

    “I love my wife” or I ‘heart’ my wife  syntax changed but the meaning stays the same.
  • The definitions encoded in ontologies allow programs to make inferences about the relationships among the objects.

    An ontology is similar to a dictionary or glossary but with greater detail and structure that enables computers to process its content.
  • OWL is used to add a meaning to the terms used together with the relations between them.

    OWL is built on the Resource Description Framework (RDF)
    OWL allows us to say things that XML Schema cannot say
    OWL can be serialized in XML
    OWL is comparable with XML but differs by providing semantic meaning
  • The goal describes the service to be searched for.
    The advertisement is used by the service provider to publish web services
  • The OWL-S ontology includes 3 sub-ontologies :

    The service profile – describes what the service does
    The process model – the process model is used to describe how the service is used
    Grounding – describes how to interact with the service

    Service profile + Service model = abstract characterization of the service
    The grounding is the concrete part related to format, transport protocol, etc. OWL class

    Each service described using OWL-S is represented by an instance of the OWL class service, which has properties that associate it with a process model and one or more groundings and optionally one or more profiles.




  • The OWL-S profile provides a set of concepts to specify the capabilities of services with the goal of capability based discovery.

    A service profile allows a provider to specify what a service does, a consumer can specify what capabilities they expect from the services they need to use. The profile provides an explicit description of those capabilities  they do not have to be extracted from incidental properties like the name of the service or the company that provides the service.

     A discovery process can find those services that are most likely to satisfy the needs of the consumer.

    OWL-S allows a service to have multiple profiles so as to allow for tailoring of advertisements for different contexts.


    ServiceCategory : may be used to refer to existing business ontologies that may not be codified in OWL
    ServiceParameter : may be used to specify additional features of the service

    Subclasses of Profile may be created dor particular domains. Example : ShippingServiceProfile  additional property geographicRegionServed
  • A process model is a description of what a service consumer must do in order to cause a service, or a collection of services, to do something.
  • The grounding ontology of OWL-S is used to specify how the abstract information exchange that are detailed by atomic-process descriptions are realized by concrete information exchanges between the consumer requesting a service and the service provider that it has chosen to use.

    A grounding maps each OWL-S atomic process to a WSDL operations and relates each OWL-S process inputs and output to elements of the input and output messages of that operation.

    Goal : enable the translation of semantic inputs generated by the consumer into the appropriate WSDL messages for transmission to the service provider; and the translation of service output messages back into appropriate semantic descriptions for interpretation by the service consumer.

    A grounding can be supplied at-runtime  allows dynamic binding to a service provider.
  • Meaningful SOA (Berlin SOA/Cloud Symposium 2010)

    1. 1. JANUARY 30, 2015 | SLIDE 1 www.realdolmen.com MEANINGful SOA Achieving Dynamic Automation and Runtime Agility
    2. 2. JANUARY 30, 2015 | SLIDE 2 AGENDA  Background  Defining MEANINGful SOA  Business Case for MEANINGful SOA  Tools  Clarifying the Theory  Q&A
    3. 3. JANUARY 30, 2015 | SLIDE 3 BACKGROUND  Many organisations adopt the Service Orientation Paradigm  Enhance the efficiency, agility, and productivity of an enterprise by positioning services representing solution logic  Each service is assigned its own distinct functional context comprised of a set of capabilities  Automate business processes through service composition  An application is now just another service composition  Intrinsic Interoperability as a strategic goal  Contract standardization, scalability, behavioral predictability, and reliability  Establish native interoperability within services in order to reduce the need for integration  Integration as a concept begins to fade within service- oriented enterprises
    4. 4. JANUARY 30, 2015 | SLIDE 4  Syntactic interoperability  Ability for multiple software components to interact regardless of their implementation programming language or hardware platform  Interfaces must conform to standards that specify consistent syntax and format across all systems  XML, WSDL, SOAP are platform independent technologies to ensure syntactic interoperability  Reducing (“loosening”) dependencies between the service contract, its implementation, and its service consumers DIFFERENT NOTIONS OF INTRINSIC INTEROPERABILITY
    5. 5. JANUARY 30, 2015 | SLIDE 5 DIFFERENT NOTIONS OF INTRINSIC INTEROPERABILITY (2)  Semantic Interoperability  Related to the "meaning" of the exchanged information  The ability of software components to have the meaning of that information accurately and automatically interpreted and "understood".  All data must be annotated with metadata using terminology and ontology identifiers Syntactic interoperability is the primary motivation of Web Services. Automation of information use and dynamic interoperability are the primary objectives of Semantic Web Services
    6. 6. JANUARY 30, 2015 | SLIDE 6 CAN WE GO FURTHER?  Yes...  We are still integrating using SOA design patterns (Intrinsic Interoperability?)  Contract standardization is hard to achieve in large organisations or between many business partners  Hard to put a canonical data model in place  ... we face difficulties and ...  Many mappings and transformations are needed  Human intervention needed to build service compositions  ... that’s why we need an extra dimension!  Meaning!  Exchanging MEANINGful information instead of just byte streams
    7. 7. JANUARY 30, 2015 | SLIDE 7
    8. 8. JANUARY 30, 2015 | SLIDE 8 SEMANTICS TO THE RESCUE?  If services published their meaning and could interpret message meaning we would be able to ...  ... avoid one-off mappings decreasing complexity and rigidity  ... extend the service contract with the semantics of the operations  ... not only discover services based on keywords but only using their content  ... find, invoke, compose and monitor services representing specific solution logic of having specific peculiarities  ... in a preferably automatic manner.
    9. 9. JANUARY 30, 2015 | SLIDE 9 CAPTURING MEANING  Relationships among entities declared in classes  Information about classes and their relationships are captured in ontologies An ontology is an explicit description of concepts. It defines a common vocabulary and a shared understanding.  Industry Standard Ontologies  OASIS Quantities and Units of Measure Ontology Standard  Dublin Core  Document ontology  FOAF (from “friend of a friend)  Describe persons and their social network  Open Biomedical (http://www.obofoundry.org)  Finance Ontology (http:// fadyart.com)
    10. 10. JANUARY 30, 2015 | SLIDE 10 MEANINGFUL SOA  Combination of Semantic Web and Service Orientation Principles  Adopting standard languages  OWL : Web Ontology Language - Semantic markup language enabling the creation of ontologies. (W3C Recommendation)  OWL-S: An ontology of service concepts for describing the properties and capabilities of (Web) services in a machine interpretable form. (W3C Submission)  Objective  Automatic service discovery  Automatic service invocation  Automatic service composition
    11. 11. JANUARY 30, 2015 | SLIDE 11 OWL-S SERVICE INTERACTION (4) Select Service (5) Construct and issue request (6) Execute Service, Generate and transmit response use (5) Construct and issue request (6) Execute Service, Generate and transmit response
    12. 12. JANUARY 30, 2015 | SLIDE 12 OWL-S MATCHMAKING  A provider publishes services using an advertisement defined by an OWL-S compliant ontology  A consumer queries the repository using a goal query described using the same ontology  Repository matches the goal and available services and returns services able to fulfill the consumer goal
    13. 13. JANUARY 30, 2015 | SLIDE 13 SERVICE ONTOLOGY  OWL-S is organized in three modules Source : OWL-S: Semantic Markup for Web Services - http://www.daml.org/services/owl-s/1.1/overview/
    14. 14. JANUARY 30, 2015 | SLIDE 14 SERVICE PROFILE Source : OWL-S: Semantic Markup for Web Services - http://www.daml.org/services/owl-s/1.1/overview/
    15. 15. JANUARY 30, 2015 | SLIDE 15 SERVICE MODEL Source : OWL-S: Semantic Markup for Web Services - http://www.daml.org/services/owl-s/1.1/overview/
    16. 16. JANUARY 30, 2015 | SLIDE 16 SERVICE GROUNDING Source : OWL-S: Semantic Markup for Web Services - http://www.daml.org/services/owl-s/1.1/overview/
    17. 17. JANUARY 30, 2015 | SLIDE 17 BUSINESS CASE FOR MEANINGFUL SOA  Tactically Applied  Data Integration  Data Warehousing and Business Intelligence  Portal Applications and Data Mashups  Data Replication, Migration, Transformation  Strategically Applied  Service Discovery  Entity Services  Decision Services  Decision making applications (tracking/tracing patterns)  Enterprise Information Management
    18. 18. JANUARY 30, 2015 | SLIDE 18 TOOLS  Semantic solutions have been adopted by niche vendors  Collibra (http://www.collibra.com)  TopQuadrant (http://www.topquadrant.com/)  Cambridge Semantics (http://www.cambridgesemantics.com/)  Expert System (http://www.expertsystem.net/)  Addition to existing enterprise stack of major vendors  Progress  TIBCO  SoftwareAG  IBM  Oracle
    19. 19. JANUARY 30, 2015 | SLIDE 19 CLARIFYING THE THEORY
    20. 20. JANUARY 30, 2015 | SLIDE 20
    21. 21. JANUARY 30, 2015 | SLIDE 21 THANK YOU johan.kumps@realdolmen.com

    ×