semantische interoperatibiliteit ngi 2008(final)
TRANSCRIPT
Semantische Interoperabiliteitbinnen het bedrijf
Voor Nederlands Genootschap voor InformaticaAfdeling architectuur12 juni 2008
Spreker : Ing. Richard Claassens MIMBedrijf : SNS BankAfdeling : SNS IT - ArchitectuurFunctie : Informatie Architect
Down-loadfile
Down-loadfile
Down-loadfile
Screenscrape
Screenscrape
Browser
HTTP/XML
Trans-action
file
Trans-action
file
Trans-action
file
Trans-action
file
Messagequeue
Messagequeue
Messagequeue
FTP
Sockets
Message
XML/HTTP
Gateway RPC
CICS gateway
APPC
SMTP
CICS gateway
ORB
Applications From Mergers and Acquisitions
Legacy Applications
Purchased Packages
Applications in Trading Partners
E-Marketplaces
End-User Development
Autonomous Divisions
Outsourced and ASP Applications
Probleemstelling
“Jaguar”
“Geautomatiseerde systemen worden steeds meer samengesteld uit delen gedistribueerde functionaliteit die vaak onafhankelijk van elkaar ontwikkeld zijn, die zich op verschillende platforms bevinden en die zich in principe overal kunnen bevinden.
Focus : semantische interoperabiliteit/integratie binnen het bedrijf
Jaguar?
De lezing is gebaseerd op
Paper: Semantische interoperabiliteit met behulp van een
bedrijfsbrede taxonomie, Richard Claassens, februari 2007
http://www.via-nova-architectura.org/magazine/reviewed/semantische-interoperabiliteit-met-behulp-van-een-bedrijfsbrede-taxo.html
Verkenning op het gebied van Web2.0 en Enterprise2.0
http://architectureren.wetpaint.com/
Agenda
Probleemstelling
Wat is semantische interoperabiliteit ?
Hulpmiddelen om semantiek te beschrijven en structureren
Ontologie
Tagging
Classificatieschema|Taxonomie
Faceted Approach
Bedrijfsbrede hulpmiddelen
Enterprise ontologie
Zachman framework
IBM IFW
Twee componenten
Interoperabiliteit
wisselwerking met één of meer andere autonome operatoren
Semantiek
speelt pas wanneer er bij die wisselwerking tekens betrokken
zijn.
Semantische Interoperabiliteit
Gebaseerd op : Pieter Wisse, Semantiek, interoperabiliteit en infrastructuur, http://www.informationdynamics.nl/pwisse/htm/semantiek_interoperabiliteit_infrastructuur.htm
Stands for
Refers toSymbolize
Concept(s) (in mind)
–or•thought •idea•intension
“Jaguar”
(Odgen, Richards, 1923)
2) Example of the ambiguity of symbols
Symbol(s) –or•term•label•code
Referent(s) -or•thing•object•extension
(Based on Ogden & Richards, 1923)
Een basismodel van semantiek: “The Meaning Triangle”
before: Frege, Peirce;see (Sowa 2000)
Semantic
origination
H2H H2A
A2H A2A
Human
Human
Application
Application
H2A2H
Semantic interpretation
Een bedrijfssysteem bestaat uitmensen, applicaties, verschillendetypen van interactie en de bijbehorende semantische stromen
Semantische stromen in bedrijfssystemen
Gebaseerd op : Dave McComb, Semantics in Business systems, The savvy manager’s guide, 2004, p. 23.
• ...HumanAgent 1(HA1)
HumanAgent 2(HA2)
exchange signs,e.g. nat. language
‘‘JAGUAR“
Internalmodels
Formalmodels
exchange signs,e.g. protocols
MA1HA1 HA2 MA2
a specific domain,e.g. animals
MachineAgent 1(MA1)
MachineAgent 2(MA2)
(H2H) (H2A),(H2A2H),(A2H) (A2A)
= flow of communication and also the flow of semantics (H2H) (H2A),(H2A2H),(A2H) (A2A)
Human to human Human to application Application to human Application to application
Stands for
Refers toSymbolize
Symbol Referent
Concept
Things in the real world
Concepts / Semantic structures
Symbols /Syntactic structures
The Meaning Triangle
&(Based on Maedche, 2002)
“The Meaning Triangle” afgebeeld op een bedrijfssysteem
• ...HumanAgent 1(HA1)
HumanAgent 2(HA2)
exchange signs,e.g. nat. language
‘‘JAGUAR“
Internalmodels
Formalmodels
exchange signs,e.g. protocols
HA1MA2
a specific domain,e.g. animals
MachineAgent 1(MA1)
MachineAgent 2(MA2)
Ontology Description
Ontology
Formal Semantics
=The ontological commitment refers to agreements on the use of the shared vocabulary by the agents committed to the ontology
Stands for
Refers toSymbolize
Symbol Referent
Concept
Things in the real world
Concepts / Semantic structures
Symbols /Syntactic structures
The Meaning Triangle
commit
MA1
commit
commit commit
HA2
commit
(Based on Maedche, 2002)
Oplossingsrichting : ontologie
a philosophical discipline The Science of Being
Aristotle, Metaphysics.
•Immanuel Kant, Charles Sanders Pierce
Ontology
Comes from
Borrowed by Used in
Welke Ontologie ?
(Based on Guarino, 1998)
Research fields
Knowledge engineering
Knowledge representation
Qualitative modeling
Language engineering
Information modeling
Information integration
Knowledge management and organization
Database design
Agent based system design
Information systems
Enterprise integration
Natural language translation
Medicine
Mechanical engineering
Standardization of product knowledge
Electronic commerce
Geographic information systems
Legal information systems
Biological information systems
Stands for
Refers toSymbolize
Symbol Referent
Concept
1)The Meaning Triangle
Philosophical viewpoint
Computer science viewpoint
An ontology is an explicit specification of a shared conceptualisation(Gruber 1995)
An ontology is a shared understanding of some domain of interest. (Uschold et al. 1996)
... philosophical discipline, branch of philosophy that deals with the natureand the organisation of reality.” (Guarino 1998)
2) Utmost views on ontology
Welke Ontologie ? twee uiterste invalshoeken
philoso-phical ontology
pragmaticontology
top level ontology
universalontology
domain specific ontology
generalontology
taskspecificontology
task inde-pendantontology
language de-pendant ontology
language inde-pendant ontology
formalontology
not formal onto-logy
VIEW
specific ontology
LEVEL SUBJECT PURPOSE LANGUAGE FORMALIZING
application specificontology
Guarino, Nicola (1998). Formal Ontology and Information Systems,. In: Formal Ontology in Information Systems, Proceedings of the First International Conference (FOIS'98), June 6-8, Trento, Italy, 3-15. Ed. Nicola Guarino. Amsterdam: IOS Press.
Bodil Nistrup Madsen (2002), based on a.o.:
ontology
Welke Ontologie ?
Natural language Formal, standardized language
TermLists(flat)
Wea
kly
stru
ctur
edS
tron
gly
stru
ctur
ed
Classification andcategorization(hierarchical)
Ontologies(associative)
Controlled Vocabulary
Authority List
Synonym ringsSubjects headings
Classification schemes
TaxonomiesMind Maps
Faceted classification
Thesauri
TAO topics maps
Full topic maps
position paper by Tore Hoel, Oslo University College, 2007
Technieken voor het beschrijven van semantiek (op een logaritmische schaal)
Natural language Formal, standardized language
TermLists(flat)
Wea
kly
stru
ctur
edS
tron
gly
stru
ctur
ed
Classification andcategorization(hierarchical)
Ontologies(associative)
Controlled Vocabulary
Authority List
Synonym ringsSubjects headings
Classification schemes
TaxonomiesMind Maps
Faceted classification
Thesauri
TAO topics maps
Full topic maps
..verschillende bedrijfsbrede hulpmiddelen er op afgebeeld
2) Tag Cloud
3)Zachman Framework
1) Enterprise ontology
4) IBM IFW
Enterprise
Purpose
Time
Action
Inter-contextrelationship
Object
Actor
FacilityLocation
(1) Voorbeeld: topniveau van een enterprise ontologie
Somebody (actor) does Something (action), for Some reasons (purpose), for Someone (object), with the help of Something (facility), Somewhere (location) and Sometimes (time)
Mauri Leppänen, A Contextual-Based Enterprise Ontology, 2007
Context
Communities of interests and boundary objects
3) Boundary objects
Distributed Intelligence: From Reflective Practitioners to Reflective Communities, Gerhard Fischer.Center for LifeLong Learning & Design (L3D)Department of Computer Science and Institute of Cognitive Science, University of Colorado, Boulder, http://l3d.cs.colorado.edu/~gerhard/, may 2005.
Artifacts, documents and perhaps even vocabulary that can help people from different communities build a shared understanding. Boundary objects will be interpreted differently by the different communities, and it is an acknowledgement and discussion of these differences that enables a shared understanding to be formed.
1) A community of practice is a group of people who do a certain type of work, talk to each other about their work, and derive some measure of their identity from that work.
2) A community of interest involves members of distinct communities of practice coming together to solve a particular problem of common concern (Arias and Fischer 2000).
1)
2)
3)
(2) Van persoonlijke tagging naar sociale tagging
Informatie objecten
Persoonlijke tagseen gebruiker organiseert eigen data en data van anderen
Tekstueel&Niet- tekstueel
Tag Cloud: A visual representation of social tags, organized into paragraph-style layout, usually in
alphabetical order, where the relative size and
weight of the font for each tag corresponds to the relative frequency of its use.
Publiekelijk toegankelijk Match?
Gebaseerd op presentatie: Digital categorization , 2005, Rashmi Sinha
= voorbeeld van een boundary object
Een informatie(object) dat de moeite waard is om terug te halen: een artikel, afbeelding, enz.
Fase 0 Fase 1
Meerdere concepten worden geactiveerd
Fase 2
Een van de concepten wordt gekozen
Categoriseer
Registreer het gekozen concept
Een informatie(object) dat de moeite waard is om terug te halen: een artikel, afbeelding, enz.
Fase 0 Fase 1
Meerdere concepten worden geactiveerd
Tagging
Registreer alle geactiveerde concepten
Het cognitieve proces achter digitale categorisatie (1) en tagging (2)
Analysis-
Paralysis!
1) Categorisatie
2) Tagging
Gebaseerd op presentatie: Digital categorization , 2005, Rashmi Sinha
e.g. DATA
ENTERPRISE ARCHITECTURE - A FRAMEWORK
Builder
SCOPE(CONTEXTUAL)
MODEL(CONCEPTUAL)
ENTERPRISE
Designer
SYSTEMMODEL(LOGICAL)
TECHNOLOGYMODEL(PHYSICAL)
DETAILEDREPRESEN- TATIONS(OUT-OF- CONTEXT)
Sub-Contractor
FUNCTIONINGENTERPRISE
DATA FUNCTION NETWORK
e.g. Data Definition
Ent = FieldReln = Address
e.g. Physical Data Model
Ent = Segment/Table/etc.
Reln = Pointer/Key/etc.
e.g. Logical Data Model
Ent = Data EntityReln = Data Relationship
e.g. Semantic Model
Ent = Business EntityReln = Business Relationship
List of Things Importantto the Business
ENTITY = Class ofBusiness Thing
List of Processes theBusiness Performs
Function = Class ofBusiness Process
e.g. "Application Architecture"
I/O = User ViewsProc .= Application Function
e.g. "System Design"
I/O = Screen/Device Formats
Proc.= Computer Function
e.g. "Program"
I/O = Control BlockProc.= Language Stmt
e.g. FUNCTION
e.g. Business Process Model
Proc. = Business ProcessI/O = Business Resources
List of Locations in which the Business Operates
Node = Major BusinessLocation
e.g. Logistics Network
Node = Business LocationLink = Business Linkage
e.g. "Distributed System
Node = I/S Function(Processor, Storage, etc)Link = Line Characteristics
e.g. "System Architecture"
Node = Hardware/SystemSoftware
Link = Line Specifications
e.g. "Network Architecture"
Node = AddressesLink = Protocols
e.g. NETWORK
Architecture"
Planner
Owner
Builder
ENTERPRISEMODEL
(CONCEPTUAL)
Designer
SYSTEMMODEL
(LOGICAL)
TECHNOLOGYCONSTRAINED
MODEL(PHYSICAL)
DETAILEDREPRESEN-
TATIONS (OUT-OF
CONTEXT)
Sub-
Contractor
FUNCTIONING
MOTIVATIONTIMEPEOPLE
e.g. Rule Specification
End = Sub-condition
Means = Step
e.g. Rule Design
End = Condition
Means = Action
e.g., Business Rule Model
End = Structural AssertionMeans =Action Assertion
End = Business ObjectiveMeans = Business Strategy
List of Business Goals/Strat
Ends/Means=Major Bus. Goal/Critical Success Factor
List of Events Significant
Time = Major Business Event
e.g. Processing Structure
Cycle = Processing CycleTime = System Event
e.g. Control Structure
Cycle = Component Cycle
Time = Execute
e.g. Timing Definition
Cycle = Machine CycleTime = Interrupt
e.g. SCHEDULE
e.g. Master Schedule
Time = Business EventCycle = Business Cycle
List of Organizations
People = Major Organizations
e.g. Work Flow Model
People = Organization UnitWork = Work Product
e.g. Human Interface
People = RoleWork = Deliverable
e.g. Presentation Architecture
People = UserWork = Screen Format
e.g. Security Architecture
People = IdentityWork = Job
e.g. ORGANIZATION
Planner
Owner
to the BusinessImportant to the Business
What How Where Who When Why
Copyright - John A. Zachman, Zachman International
SCOPE(CONTEXTUAL)
Architecture
e.g. STRATEGY ENTERPRISE
e.g. Business Plan
TM
Zachman Institute for Framework Advancement - (810) 231-0531
1 2 3 4 5 6
1
2
3
4
5
(3)
The Information Framework
-Three views-Three levels
-Ten columns-Five rows
-Fifty cells
(Modelware International, 1999)
III) Technical ViewII) Business ViewI) Organisation View
Structure SkillsStrategy Data Functions Workflow Solutions Interface Networks Platform
Domain Concept(A-level)
Domain Classification(B-level)
GenericTemplate(C-level)
DesignContext(C’-level)
OperationalBound(D-level)
Deconstructionlevel
Compositionlevel
Implementationlevel
Types of infomation
of constraint
Business Data Concepts Classification =
(4)
Level
EnglishProsePoetry
SonnetBallad
GermanProsePoetry
SonnetBallad
FrenchProsePoetry
SonnetBallad
To illustrate the differences between faceted and enumerative classifications, consider the class Literature.
In an enumerative scheme we might have the following subclasses:
Language facet :
EnglishGermanFrench
Form facet :
ProsePoetry
SonnetBallad
In a faceted scheme we might have the following instructions and subclasses:
Language facet is cited before form facet
Citation order:
Faceted classificationa Library discipline
Ranganathan 1939
Involved Party(IP)INVOLVEDPARTYTYPE
Individual INDIVIDUAL GENDERFemale
Male
OrganizationORGANIZATION LEGAL STRUCTURETYPE
Corporation
Partnership
IP DescriptorIP DESCRIPTORTYPE
IPName componentIP NAMECOMPONENT TYPE
Given Name
Name Initial
Family name
IP RelationshipIP RELATIONSHIPTYPE
IP/IP-relationshipIP/IPRELATIONSHIPTYPE
IP is spouse of IP
IP is employee of IP
IP is customer of IP
INDIVIDUALEMPLOYMENTSTATUS
Working Individual
Not Employed Individual
1. Fundamental hierarchy
2. Descriptive hierarchy
3. Relationship hierarchy
Answer(s) Question = + scheme
Explanation of the B-level-Concept Involved party (IP)
(Modelware International, 1999)
IFW Framework-3 Layers of the data column
Deconstructionlevel
Compositionlevel
Implementationlevel
Conceptual
Logical
Physical
A-level
B-level
C-level & C’-level
D-level
9 data concepts
27 classification hierarchies
54 business objects
(Modelware International, 1999)
Semantische Interoperabiliteitbinnen het bedrijf Bedrijfsbrede taxonomieën met de volgende karakteristieken:
Een ‘boundary object’ voor de diverse ‘communities’, die met het
bedrijfsinformatiesysteem te maken hebben
als communicatiemiddel dat effectieve en efficiënte samenwerking
ondersteunt
Een middel om standaardisatieprocessen te ondersteunen
Voor efficiënte ontwikkeling van applicaties en koppelingen tussen
geautomatiseerde systemen
Vermindering van fouten in de gegevensverwerking
Initieel ontwikkeld op basis van ontologieën, die het relevante deel van
de realiteit zo goed mogelijk beschrijven
Om te komen tot een stabiele basisstructuur, die met minimale impact
aanpasbaar en uitbreidbaar is