Semantic Web Service Usage Tasks in WSMO - Enabling Semantic Web Services: The Web Service Modeling Ontology - page 120

// Heterogeneous Ontology Concepts
ontology ”http://www.example.org/ontologies/TravelRequestOntology”
concept station
startLocation ofType boolean
destinationLocation ofType boolean
name ofType string

ontology ”http://www.example.org/ontologies/TravelOfferOntology”
concept route
from ofType (0 1)

string

to ofType (0 1) string

// Mapping Definitions
Mapping (http: //www.example.org/ontologies/TravelRequestOntology#station
http : //www.example.org/ontologies/TravelOfferOntology#route
classMapping (one

way station route))
Mapping (http: //www.example.org/ontologies/TravelRequestOntology#destination Location
http : //www.example.org/ontologies/TravelOfferOntology#to
attributeMapping (one − way
[( station ) destinationLocation = > boolean] [( route) to = > string]))
valueCondition ( station [( station ) destination Location = > boolean] true)
Mapping (http: //www.example.org/ontologies/TravelRequestOntology#start Location
http : //www.example.org/ontologies/TravelOfferOntology#from
attributeMapping (one − way
[( station ) start Location = > boolean] [( route) from = > string]))
valueCondition ( station [( station ) startLocation = > boolean] true)

−

Listing 9.1. Example of a definition of an ontology mapping

of terminology mismatches, consider that the ontology used by the requester
contains the concept station , and that the one used by the provider contains
the concept route . There are two terminological mismatches: (1) the attribute
startLocation of the concept station corresponds to the attribute from in
the concept route ; (2) the attribute destinationLocation of the concept
station corresponds to the attribute to of the concept route .Inorderto
allow automated processing via ontology mapping, we need to create three
mapping rules: one for stating the relation between the two concepts and two
for imposing mappings between their attributes. Listing 9.1 shows this using
the abstract mapping language presented in [119], for higher flexibility and
easier maintenance of mappings. The constructs used here are mappings be-
tween concepts and mappings between attributes. Each mapping has a source
and a target indicated by IRIs, a direction (here, there is one way from the
source to the target), and possible conditions on the mapping (see [94] for
details on syntax and semantics of the mapping language).

Process-Level Mediation

The second mediation level is concerned with mismatches on the behavioral
level that can occur consumption of a Web service consumption or interaction
of several Web services. For instance, at some point during the consumption
of a Web service S by a requester R , R may expect an acknowledgement
while S waits for the next input; therefore, the interaction process between