Semantic SOA Governance

410 views
298 views

Published on

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
410
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Semantic SOA Governance

  1. 1. Semantic SOA Governance Keshava Rangarajan, Applications Architect, Oracle America, Inc. Arivoli Tirouvingadame,Principal Member of Technical Staff, Oracle America, Inc. Oracle Proprietary. Copyright 2008, Oracle Corporation
  2. 2. SOA Governance and SemanticsGartner defines SOA Governance as “Ensuring and validating thatassets and artifacts within the architecture are acting as expected andmaintaining a certain level of quality.”Semantic technology allows for the meaning of and associationsbetween information to be known and processed at execution time Oracle Proprietary. Copyright 2008, Oracle Corporation
  3. 3. Facilitating Governance: Potential for Semantics Added Intelligence•Enable sharing of services and service artifacts via Semantics•Manage the lifecycle of services and artifacts (Taxonomies, Ontologies and Inferencing)•Manage quality of services and artifacts•Define and manage policies•Associate policies with services and artifacts•Ensure policy compliance•Manage contracts between consumers and providers•Administer and configure services and their policies•Ensure automatic enforcement of runtime policies•Monitor runtime systems•Integrate SOA governance with traditional SDLC and ITmanagement processes•Gather metrics and enable reporting Oracle Proprietary. Copyright 2008, Oracle Corporation
  4. 4. Semantics & SOA Governance-The potential for application of Semantics in SOA governance is enormous-Building Governance functions on a base Semantic infrastructure will addenormous valueThe following cross cutting scenarios will hopefully illustrate the possibilities:-Ontology based Service Browsing (based on Taxonomical Perspectives)-Contextual Tagging and Association, Rating, Taxonomy and Folksonomyreconciliation-Semantic Service Artifact Search (Intelligent Find & Bind)-Automated Service Classification Oracle Proprietary. Copyright 2008, Oracle Corporation
  5. 5. The Service Browsing Need• In both design time and runtime governance contexts, the need for service taxonomies has long been acknowledged by the technology experts in SOA governance solutions.• Many service taxonomies have been proposed but none suffice• Listed below is a small selection of proposed taxonomies for SOA services: JP Morgenthal: Bill Roth: Randy Heffner: Oracle: SAP: • Data • Component • Business • WIP • TBD • Orchestration • Data • Transactional • Image (Document) • Business • Query & content • Business Services • Workflow • Analytical • Management • Application • Security • Functional • Data • Common • Infrastructure Oracle Proprietary. Copyright 2008, Oracle Corporation
  6. 6. The Service Browsing need: Service Ontology• Despite coming from people of very diverse backgrounds (Architect, Executive, Analyst etc.), the aforementioned taxonomies are remarkably similar i.e. they are layered, well structured, based on deep understanding of SOA principles.• They are not particularly useful to a business service provider who wants to offer a Customer Invoicing Service, or a business service consumer in need of a Payment Processing Service.• These taxonomies (by definitions, these are actually not taxonomies but classifications) are too small to sufficiently narrow services down in order to create a target rich environment• Business users do not relate to services in these terms; hence acceptance by business community is difficult• Domain driven taxonomies solve the problem partially, but still universal taxonomies are not the solution; multiple role driven taxonomies are more practical Oracle Proprietary. Copyright 2008, Oracle Corporation
  7. 7. From Core Governance Information Model Order Management QOS Class Service Domain Rdfs:subclassOf Classification rdfs:subclassOf rdfs:subclassOf rdfs:subclassOf Inventory rdfs:subclassOf QOS ClassOwl:restriction(belongsTo) Services Domain OM High Owl:restriction(relatedTo) Response Inventory Services QOS Class Service Class Owl:restriction(relatedTo) Owl:restriction(relatedTo) High Availability Logistics Owl:restriction(relatedTo) Service Class Owl:restriction(relatedTo) Owl:restriction(belongsTo) ServicesLogistics Domain Manufacturing Manufacturing Services Owl:restriction (belongsTo) Domain Owl:restriction(belongsTo) Service A Service B Service C QAOntology( browsed via QATaxonomy) Business Ontology (browsed via Business Taxonomy) Architectural Ontology( browsed via Architectural Taxonomy) Oracle Proprietary. Copyright 2008, Oracle Corporation
  8. 8. Core Governance Information Model Oracle Proprietary. Copyright 2008, Oracle Corporation
  9. 9. Service Taxonomy Continued• Service Taxonomies can be represented in OWL• RDFS subclass (for hierarchical relationships)• “OWL:same as” and “OWL:equivalence” relations (for interrelations within and across taxonomies)• Tree View for Taxonomy visualization• Faceted views for multiple taxonomies• Contextual Popups for cross referencing relationships• Allow user to browse multiple services• Allow user to search multiple services• Allow user to cross-navigate between different views/domains Oracle Proprietary. Copyright 2008, Oracle Corporation
  10. 10. The Solution: Semantic Service Browsing ComponentThe requirements of this ontology based Service Browsing Component (SBC)are: • SBC should be able to support multiple hierarchical • SBC should provide security. There will be three primary taxonomies. types of actors using the SBC: administrators who create • SBC should be able support non-hierarchical (“see also”) and maintain taxonomies, publishers who register their relationships between nodes. services in the defined taxonomies, and users who browse • SBC should support typed relationships between nodes in the taxonomies to locate the services they need. Security taxonomies. The types should be user-definable but should requirements for each type of actor are outlined below. be able to express generalization, aggregation, refinement, • SBC administrators should be able to create and modify type-of and equivalence. taxonomies, and delegate administration rights to • It should be possible to annotate nodes with plain text and individual nodes and sub-trees. XML descriptions. • Service publishers should be able to register services to • SBC should allow to import an external taxonomy. taxonomies, individual nodes and sub-trees. • SBC should support unique identification of taxonomies, • SBC Users should be able to browse taxonomies and nodes and relationships. search within them. The read access should be granted • SBC should support federation by stubbing internal or on per-node basis. The users will not be able to go into or external taxonomies to nodes in other taxonomies. under the nodes to which they do not have access. • SBC should support versioning of taxonomies, nodes and • SBC should provide GUI-based and programmatic access relationship types. to all functionality. • SBC should support deprecation of taxonomies, nodes and • SBC should provide notification capability to inform relationship types. Users can browse and search in interested parties when certain changes occur. Users deprecated taxonomies and nodes, but service publishers should be able to register to receive notifications by event should not be able to publish into them. scope and type. The scopes include taxonomy, node, sub- • SBC should support both direct (nodes-to-entities) and tree; and the event types: service published, unpublished, reverse (entities-to-nodes) referential models. This would object deprecation and change. ensure that category-based searches will be supported with booth cooperating service registries and repositories, which can express relationships to the categorizing taxonomy nodes as part of the metadata associated with services and with non-cooperative ones. Oracle Proprietary. Copyright 2008, Oracle Corporation
  11. 11. The Automated Service Classification needThe Problem:• New Services are being created at a rapid pace• Enterprises have a large number of services• Service attributes & behavior are constantly being modified (Service Life cycle)• Multiple Taxonomies exist for organization and navigation of services• Service specifications, contracts, components are also being modified at a rapid pace (Service Life Cycle)• Services need to be continually classified and reclassified based on their attributes such that they appear in the right places in taxonomies both interactively and periodically• Service Semantics are typically buried in descriptions, tags and other textual or service description attributes• Service classification needs to be done in an automated fashion as manual categorization could be error prone Oracle Proprietary. Copyright 2008, Oracle Corporation
  12. 12. Solution: The Service Classification Component (SCC)• Service Classification via Text & Service Attribute Mining (SVM based classification in a Data Mining provides the right tools to make this happen)• Classification component (Data Mining) takes in OWL files that contain standardized Service Taxonomy as well as the OWL files containing Service definitions and descriptions, extracts attribute values from the files and classifies the Services automatically into appropriate nodes in the Service Taxonomy Oracle Proprietary. Copyright 2008, Oracle Corporation
  13. 13. The Contextual Tagging and Association NeedThe Problem:• Service Taxonomies organize Governance artifacts into hierarchical structures that are static and typically standardized• Service Folksonomies arise from personal free tagging of governance resources for ones own use and the aggregate collection of tags that results from a governance group tagging• While standard Taxonomical structures encourage standardization, they are not necessarily the most user friendly mechanisms to facilitate easy access• There is a need for a component to contextually cross reference (i.e cross navigate) tags in a Folksonomy to a node in one or more Service Taxonomies and vice versa• When a governance item (say a service) is tagged by a user with a keyword such as “reliable”, what is implied is “category=reliable”. The issue with this is that sometimes “category” is not enough context for a tag. Meaning always requires context. Oracle Proprietary. Copyright 2008, Oracle Corporation
  14. 14. The Contextual Tagging and Association Need• A simple approach to connecting tagging to semantics is to allow the user to pick tags from a predefined controlled vocabulary derived from ontology. When the user shares this tag after it has been validated, it can be used by the search (semantic/text) engine to improve search relevance and inferencing. It also helps other users and improves collective intelligence. Thus the user also participates in the knowledge categorization process.• A slightly different but more effective approach would be to allow the user to label the context of a tag with anything (where the default is implicitly “category”). In the “category=reliable” example, the user could label something as “service-behavior=reliable” or “service-provider=reliable”. The categories here are service- behavior & service-provider. These groups of category tags i.e. “metatags” allow you to indicate the context of a tag and give tags greater meaning and less ambiguity.• Popular web metatags that internet users have already created include “location=” for places and “fav=” for people’s favorites. When the user picks metatags from a predefined controlled vocabulary derived from the enterprise ontology and shares this metatagging, it can be used by the semantic search engine to improve search relevance and inferencing. The advantage of this approach is that this provides the user the ability to continue to use his/her own custom tags.• UI navigational constructs can to be provided such that cross navigation b/w taxonomies to contextually relevant tags and vice versa is enabled. This way a user is not confined to browsing and locating repository elements by just one metaphor (i.e. predefined taxonomies or just tags). Oracle Proprietary. Copyright 2008, Oracle Corporation
  15. 15. Solution: The Contextual Cross Referencing Component (CCR)• This component will receive the context of a node in a Service Taxonomy and will be able to provide a set of associated Tags that relate to the item in context• This component could also receive an item in context from a Folksonomy and be able to provide a set of associated Taxonomy node points• This output can be used for cross navigating from the Taxonomy to the Folksonomy Domain Oracle Proprietary. Copyright 2008, Oracle Corporation
  16. 16. The Semantic Search Need (Intelligent Find & Bind)The Problem:• For both design time, change time as well as runtime governance, users need to be able to search on Governance artifacts based on • Functional description of the Service • QoS attributes of the Service • Contractual aspects of the Service • Runtime characteristics of the Service • Associated entities or attributes of associated entities in a Service Ontology • Other informational attributes that require an • Understanding of the meaning or intent of these Service Artifacts • Service Relationships Oracle Proprietary. Copyright 2008, Oracle Corporation
  17. 17. Cross Cutting Need: Semantic Search for Governace SPARQL Query SPARQL Rules Jena Adapter for Oracle Generator Templates Jena Inferencing Engine SOA ORACLE Enterprise Triplets for SPARQL GeneratorRegistry 10gR3 Taxonomy <Subject, Object, Predicate> Jena-Oracle APIs for Triples Generator Bulk Load of RDF Query Result Object with Verb, Class and Instance values already recognized from the String & striped by the Enterprise Vocabulary OWL Schema OWL Instance Transformation Triplets to UI Enterprise Object Stanford Naïve Entity Vocabulary Recognizer XSD2OWL XML2OWL Convertor Tool Convertor Tool Trainer Search String Enterprise Vocabulary Instance Enterprise Data Schema Search String [Instances - XML] [EBO XSD] Presentation Layer Dashboard Oracle Proprietary. Copyright 2008, Oracle Corporation
  18. 18. Solution: The Semantic Service Search Component (SSS)A component that performs:- Intelligent, Business Context based search : Search across structured,semi-structured and unstructured Governance data- Guides and assists end-users who want to search using NaturalLanguage queries- Powerful Inferencing capabilities for users whose intent is not known:System can bring to their attention what they need to know, but may notknow that they need it- Unified UI with ability to take actions across Governance applications viaweb services associated with a base Ontology Oracle Proprietary. Copyright 2008, Oracle Corporation
  19. 19. Link-blogging and Bookmarking need• There is an intersection between bookmarking and web logging(“blogging”), where ‘link blogging’, the process of creating governancecontent that is a link to a site with a short comment, rather than a full lengthblog post, is possibly better handled through a dedicated bookmarkingsystem• Examples: Del.icio.us or Wists posting to a blog via standard API’s whileadding to a shared directory in parallel.• We need to adopt this concept deeply in our Governance applications Oracle Proprietary. Copyright 2008, Oracle Corporation
  20. 20. RSS & Metadata need• RSS 1.0 and 2.0 extend the notion of the earliest versions of RSS as a means tosyndicate simple headlines and links with extensible modules, allowing for anymetadata to be syndicated through RSS.• Despite the fact that RSS has been around for nearly 10 years and that extendingRSS via modules has been around for 5, there are no RSS aggregators that canread a new RSS module or extension, on-the-fly, allow for results to be filtered bythis metadata and display it correctly.• An example would be addition of a tag called “Pricing service performance” -allowing a user to be informed whenever any pricing service performance relatedevents/notifications/announcements are raised/made. Oracle Proprietary. Copyright 2008, Oracle Corporation
  21. 21. RSS, Metatags & Semantics need• By allowing users to create metatags and attaching these metatags to theirown ‘namespace’, we allow for the possibility of formally defining groups ofmetatags as an RSS module for a specific industry/deployment.• Thus the application can host standard RSS modules (filters) that use metatagsas filters criterion to display information that is meaningful/relevant togovernance application user For e.g. filters could be setup to look for items thatare tagged by “service=inventory availability; performance=high;provider=reliable” to collectively form an RSS filter module that looks for“reliable, high performance, inventory availability services”. Oracle Proprietary. Copyright 2008, Oracle Corporation
  22. 22. SOA Governance and Semantics Demo Oracle Proprietary. Copyright 2008, Oracle Corporation

×