XML Clearinghouse Report

14 Semantic Web Technologies in the Automotive Industry

Herausgeber: Prof. Dr.-Ing. Robert Tolksdorf Freie Universität Berlin Institut für Informatik Netzbasierte Informationssysteme Dr. Rainer Eckstein Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin Institut für Informatik Datenbanken und Informationssysteme ISSN (Print): 1861-1222 ISSN (Internet):1861-1230

team@xml-clearinghouse.de www.xml-clearinghouse.de © XML Clearinghouse

Semantic Web Technologies in the Automotive Industry
Duc Minh Nguyen, Anja Jentzsch May 12, 2005

1

Contents
1 Introduction 2 Data Interchange standards 2.1 EDI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2 ODETTE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3 X12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.4 UN/EDIFACT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.5 XML/EDI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.6 ebXML . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.7 XML::EDIFACT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.8 Verband der Automobilindustrie (VDA) . . . . . . . . . 2.9 STAR (Standards for Technology in Automotive Retail) 3 3 4 6 6 7 10 11 12 12 13

. . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

3 Bringing Together different Formats 13 3.1 Covisint . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 3.2 Redix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 4 Process and Data Management 15 4.1 Product Data Management (PDM) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 4.2 PDTnet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 5 Comparison EDI and XML e-commerce 18

6 Semantic Web Technologies 18 6.1 SIMI-Pro . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 6.2 Corporate Ontology Grid (COG) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 6.3 Solutions by Ontoprise GmbH at AUDI AG . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 6.4 Systems Analysis of Modelling and Validation of Renault Automobiles(SAMOVAR) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 7 Summary 20

List of Figures
1 2 3 4 5 6 Transformation Odette UML Sample Model to XML Schema [29] The X12 protocol [33] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Covisint as a Hub [6] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Covisint Features [6] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PDTnet Concept [32] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Semantic search mechanism as proposed in [10] . . . . . . . . . . 7 8 13 14 16 19

2

Abstract This report presents protocols which are currently used in the automotive industry and their successors, which are based on Semantic Web technologies. An overview of electronic data interchange standards is given, including formats for describing processes. Some solutions that aim at unifying the communication between companies with different protocols are introduced. After looking at the business to business communication the internal process and data management protocols of a company is presented. With the multitude of protocols in mind, the advantages of XML-enabled e-commerce is compared e-commerce without XML. Finally research projects are presented, which make use of Semantic Web technologies to improve the existing technologies and develop new views on existing data.

1

Introduction

This article tries to carry together current standards that are used in the automotive industry and emerging applications of Semantic Web Technologies. In the 1970’s the first efforts were already made towards an Electronic Data Interchange standard (EDI) which would simplify the business to business communication. The slow and error-prone paper communication was to be substituted by EDI. This compilation is not complete, as some protocols are not publicly available. The structure of this article is as follows. First the standards for business to business (B2B) communication summarized. Two examples serve to describe the unification approach for the incompatible protocols. Then a short description of Process Data Management (PDM) follows with details on PDTnet (Product Data Technology Network). A short comparison of XML and EDI concludes the standards part. The following section examines current research on application of Semantic Web Technologies in the automotive industry. The last section summarizes all preceding sections.

2

Data Interchange standards

Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) was introduced and designed to meet the business needs of the 1970’s, using the technology available at that time. With the advent of personal computers and the Internet, technology has made significant improvements. Additionally, business processes have changed dramatically and the traditional EDI methodology is being asked to do more than it is capable. Over the years EDI has morphed into many different forms. Trying to fit a single solution into many different situations has necessitated the management of redundant standards such as X-12 (an ANSI standard that supplies structure of business data exchanged between companies), EDIFACT (Electronic Data Interchange For Administration, Commerce and Transport), and others. As a result, companies supporting EDI are often forced to adopt multiple systems in order to comply with each of their customers. In effect, every company has had to create multiple, customer specific infrastructures to maintain trading activities. Along with that, many companies are forced to manage processes

3

ISA ˜03˜T5ZXM54W23˜01˜CA67MFFILE˜ 3 2 ˜ 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 ˜ 0 1 ˜ 6 1 7 8 5 6 9 4 3 ˜ 0 2 0 6 3 0 ˜ 0 9 3 1 ˜ | ˜ 0 0 4 0 3 ˜ 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 6 ˜ 0 ˜T˜ˆ\ GS˜TF˜COMPANYROUTING˜ 6 1 7 8 5 6 9 4 3 0 5 0 ˜ 2 0 0 2 0 6 2 7 ˜ 0 9 3 1 ˜ 1 0 0 0 6 ˜X˜ 0 0 40 3 0 \ ST˜ 8 1 3 ˜ 1 0 0 0 0 6 \ BTI˜T6 ˜ 0 5 0 ˜ 4 7 ˜ 6 1 7 8 5 6 9 4 3 0 5 0 ˜ 2 0 0 2 0 6 2 7 ˜ ˜ 2 4 ˜ 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 ˜ 4 9 ˜ 0 5 0 5 2 9 6 6 ˜ ˜ ˜ 0 0 \ DTM˜ 6 8 3 ˜ ˜ ˜ ˜RD8˜20020501 −20020531\ TIA ˜ 5 0 0 0 ˜ ˜ 1 . 0 \ TIA ˜ 5 0 0 1 ˜ ˜ ˜ 2 0 8 3 7 6 9 4 ˜GA\ N1˜L9˜ P i p e l i n e A Company\ N3˜123 O i l Lane \ N4˜Any Town˜CA˜25704˜US\ PER˜CN˜ Timothy C . Doe˜TE˜ 2 2 2 5 5 5 0 1 0 1 ˜FX˜ 2 2 2 5 5 5 0 1 0 2 ˜EM˜ TimDoe@pipelineA . com\ PER˜EA˜Bobby G. Doe˜TE˜ 2 2 2 5 5 5 0 3 0 3 ˜FX˜ 2 2 2 5 5 5 0 3 0 4 ˜EM˜ BobbyDoe@pipelineA . com\

Listing 1: EDI Vessel/Pipeline Operator Report Data for Pipeline A Company [5]

for which they are ill equipped, such as registration, partner management, and infrastructure up-keep. The problem is getting larger. The automotive industry has been increasing its use of EDI by 20% per year and this is projected to continue into the future (source: AMR, 2003) [6]. According to these sources the performance and bandwidth was critical at the time (1970’s) EDI was developed. Therefore the protocol consists mainly of codes which can be efficiently transferred over a network: Another example can be found at [8]. The problems resulting from that approach is that the protocols are difficult to implement and applications that make use of these protocols are hard to maintain. The EDI, X12, EDIFACT and other protocols are covered in more detail in the following text.

2.1

EDI

(Electronic Data Interchange) EDI is the computer-to-computer interchange of strictly formatted messages that represent documents other than monetary instruments. EDI implies a sequence of messages between two parties, either of whom may serve as originator or recipient. The formatted data representing the documents may be transmitted from originator to recipient via telecommunications or physically transported on electronic storage media. In EDI, the usual processing of received messages is by computer only. Human intervention in the processing of a received message is typically intended only for error conditions, for quality review, and for special situations. For example, the transmission of binary or textual data is not EDI as defined here unless the data are treated as one or more data elements of an EDI message and are not normally intended for human interpretation as part of on-line data processing. An example of EDI is a set of interchanges between a buyer and a seller. Messages from buyer to seller could include, for example, request for quotation (RFQ), purchase order, receiving advice and payment advice; messages from seller to buyer could include, simi- larly, bid in response to RFQ, purchase order acknowledgment, shipping notice and invoice. These messages may simply provide information, e.g., receiving advice or shipping notice, or they may include data that may be interpreted as a legally binding obligation, e.g., bid in 4

response to RFQ or purchase order. EDI is being used also for an increasingly diverse set of concerns, for example, for interchanges between healthcare providers and insurers, for travel and hotel bookings, for education administration, and for government regulatory, statistical and tax reporting [23]. From the point of view of the standards needed, EDI may be defined as an interchange between computers of a sequence of standardized messages taken from a predetermined set of message types. Each message is composed, according to a standardized syntax, of a sequence of standardized data elements. It is the standardization of message formats using a standard syntax, and the standardization of data elements within the messages, that makes possible the assembling, disassembling, and processing of the messages by computer. Implementation of EDI requires the use of a family of interrelated standards. Standards are required for, at minimum: (a) the syntax used to compose the messages and separate the various parts of a message, (b) types and definitions of application data elements, most of variable length, (c) the message types, defined by the identification and sequence of data elements forming each message, and (d) the definitions and sequence of control data elements in message headers and trailers. Additional standards may define: (e) a set of short sequences of data elements called data segments, (f) the manner in which more than one message may be included in a single transmission, and (g) the manner of adding protective measures for integrity, confidentiality, and authentication into transmitted messages [23]. There are several different EDI standards in use today, but the achievement of a single universally-used family of EDI standards is a long-range goal. A single universally-used family of standards would make use of EDI more efficient and minimize aggregate costs of use. Specifically, it would (a) minimize needs for training of personnel in use and maintenance of EDI standards, (b) eliminate duplication of functionality and the costs of achieving that duplication now existing in different systems of standards, (c) minimize requirements for different kinds of translation software, and (d) allow for a universal set of data elements that would ease the flow of data among different but interconnected applications, and thereby maximize useful information interchange. FIPS PUB (Federal Information Processing Standards Publications) recognizes the reality that some families of EDI standards were developed to provide solutions to immediate needs, and that inclusion of the goal of universality in their development would have unacceptably delayed their availability. However, a future is envisioned in which the benefits of universality outweigh the sunk costs in specialized solutions, leading first to cooperation among standards developers, then to harmonization of standards, and eventually to a single universally accepted family of EDI standards [23]. About 50,000 private sector companies in the United States, like Federal Express, Eastman Kodak, American Airlines, Nike, Staples, Nationsbank, JC Penney, and others currently use EDI. EDI is widely used in these industries: manufacturing, shipping, warehousing, utilities, pharmaceuticals, construction, petroleum, food processing, and health care. A recent study projects that the number of companies using EDI will quadruple in the next six years [37].

5

UNB UNOA:1+ O00150ER99+O0031130300261091 +961115:1840+00016 ’ + UNH+1+DELINS : 3 : : OD’ MID+ARD’ SDT+109930 ’ BDT COMPANY NAME’ + CSG+12+20130 ’ ARD 2E0 289 203 A 01C+:PCE+000001 ’ + PDI+000000014+961028 ’ SAD+1+121H: JONES, TONY: ( 1 5 1 4 ) 1243 −46498+03 ’ FTX+ZUR NULLSTELLUNG ERR . : FORTSCHR. ZAHL AB 1 1 . 1 1 . ’ SID+2+ 2 ’ M: DEL+ 9 6 1 1 1 8 + 0 : : 6 ’ ADI+000000015+961118 ’ UNT+13+1’ UNZ+1+00016 ’

Listing 2: Example ODETTE Message (OFTP) [4]:

2.2

ODETTE

(Organisation for Data Exchange by Teletransmission in Europe) ODETTE International is an organisation, formed by the automotive industry for the automotive industry. It sets the standards for e-business communications, engineering data exchange and logistics management, which link the 4000 plus businesses in the European motor industry and their global trading partners [26]. ODETTE has proposed some standards to unify the communication and business processes of automotive companies. Among those standards the OFTP (ODETTE File Transfer Protocol) [27] is related to EDI. Other protocols cover Process Data Management and other B2B processes (an example in [28]). Owing to the industrial character of the protocols access to most documents is restricted and password-protected. The XML Recommendation [29] provides a UML (Unified Modelling Language) modelling set and an XML wrapper for ODETTE models. The UML modelling set is used to modell EDI scenarios. The XMI (XML Metadata Interchange) representation of that UML modell can then be transformed (using XSLT) into an XML representation of OFTP which then can be transformed into other protocols. Figure 1 shows the modelling process. Automobile companies and large ”tier 1” suppliers already make use of the ODETTE XML Standard, which is used in the ”ZF PortalManager”. European automotive companies like BMW, VW, DaimlerChrysler, Renault and suppliers as ZF, Bosch, Faurecia have agreed upon using the ODETTE XML Standard in the ZF PortalManager (since Version 1.3). Thus, all participating companies implement interfaces conforming to the ODETTE XML Standard in their own portals, making an easy data interchange possible.

2.3

X12

X12 is the North American variant of an EDI protocol [42]. The general structure is shown in Figure 2. X12 is not compatible to the OFTP protocol. In order to perform Data Interchange between those protocols the messages have to be mapped to the other protocol. It is a difficult task as it demands knowledge of both protocols. In 2002 the ASC X12 Reference Model for XML Design [2] was released, which proposes a granularity model, an architecture, meta data for storing ar-

6

Figure 1: Transformation Odette UML Sample Model to XML Schema [29] chitecture components and XML Syntax design with approaches to implementing XML syntax. High level design rules are given which lead to consistent XML format for different branches of industry.

2.4

UN/EDIFACT

(United Nations/Electronic Data Interchange for Administration, Commerce and Transport) Trade facilitation deals with the requirements and procedures related to the flow of information needed for the international movement of goods. Traditionally, these requirements have been substantiated in the form of paper documents and procedures carried out through handling such documents; it was therefore only natural that initial facilitation efforts should focus on the simplification and standardization of external trade documents. Technological developments, however, have made alternative information handling and transmission methods feasible; in addition, the scope of international co-operation has been extended from document harmonization to more profound research on the identification of basic information requirements and the development of an entirely new methodology to satisfy them. It is significant that the UN/ECE Working Party on the Simplification and Standardization of External Trade Documents, set up in l960, became in l972 the Working Party on Facilitation of International Trade Procedures, with terms of reference extended to cover, inter alia, the development of a standard international trade data terminology and a uniform system for use in automatic processing and

7

Figure 2: The X12 protocol [33] transmission of trade data [39]. The handling of trade data includes two major types of activity, processing and transmission. As to the processing of information, the development of automatic data processing equipment which can be used for commercial applications has introduced a powerful rationalization tool for those involved in international trade. Although data processed automatically can, without difficulty, be presented in normal paper documents, subsequently to be forwarded and handled in the traditional way, the obvious and very desirable alternative is to make the information directly available to exchange partners having data processing equipment at their disposal. This introduces–quite apart from the method used for processing data prior to transmission–a need to rationalize the physical transmittal of data, from the slow and cumbersome mailing of documents to more direct and rapid information exchange. It is evident that, when using automatic data interchange, a much more rigid discipline needs to be exercised regarding data presentation and exchange rules than in the case of paper documents. Even though the required technology and services are available, this does 8

ISA ∗ 0 0 ∗ ∗ 0 0 ∗ ∗ 2 7 ∗ 0 0 8 8 3 ∗ZZ∗ I 0 8 5 8 7 ∗ 0 2 0 8 0 2 ∗ 0 0 4 6 ∗U∗ 0 0 4 0 1 ∗ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 ∗ 0 ∗T∗ : ˜ GS∗HP∗00883∗ I 0 8 5 8 7 ∗ 2 0 0 2 0 8 0 2 ∗ 0 0 4 6 5 3 ∗ 1 3 ∗X∗004010 X091˜ ST∗ 8 3 5 ∗ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 ˜ BPR∗H∗0∗C∗NON∗∗ ∗∗∗ ∗∗ ∗∗∗ ∗∗ 2 0 0 2 0 7 3 1 ˜ TRN∗ 1 ∗ 5 0 7 3 7 0 2 6 7 ∗ 1 5 7 1 0 6 2 3 2 6 ˜ REF∗EV∗ I 0 8 5 8 7 ˜ DTM∗ 4 0 5 ∗ 2 0 0 2 0 7 3 1 ˜ N1∗PR∗PALMETTO GBA˜ N3∗PO BOX 182957˜ N4∗COLUMBUS∗OH∗ 4 3 2 1 8 2 9 5 7 ˜ REF∗2U∗00883˜ PER∗CX∗ATTN; PROGRAM INTEGRITY∗TE∗ 8 7 7 5 6 7 9 2 3 2 ˜ N1∗PE∗ROHOLT VISION INSTITUTE∗ FI ∗ 3 4 1 9 5 8 3 8 0 ˜ N3∗4425 METRO CIRCLE N W˜ N4∗NORTH CANTON∗OH∗ 4 4 7 2 0 7 7 5 5 ˜ REF∗1C∗ 9 3 1 6 3 4 1 ˜ LX∗1˜ CLP∗ 3 6 0 8 ∗ 4 ∗ 9 5 ∗ 0 ∗ 0 ∗MB∗ 0 2 0 2 2 1 2 2 5 3 4 9 0 ˜ NM1∗QC∗1∗ROLLINS∗CAROL∗A∗∗∗HN∗ 2 7 4 3 0 0 3 8 0A˜ NM1∗82∗1∗∗∗∗∗∗UP∗ U86692 ˜ MOA∗∗∗MA130˜ DTM∗ 0 5 0 ∗ 2 0 0 2 0 7 3 1 ˜ SVC∗HC: 9 2 0 1 4 ∗ 9 5 ∗ 0 ∗ ∗ 0 ∗ ∗ 1 ˜ DTM∗ 4 7 2 ∗ 2 0 0 2 0 2 2 0 ˜ CAS∗CO∗11∗95˜ REF∗6R∗13508˜ REF∗LU∗11˜ REF∗1C∗ 4 0 5 8 9 9 1 ˜ LQ∗HE∗M81˜ SE∗ 2 8 ∗ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 ˜ GE∗1∗13˜ IEA ∗ 1 ∗ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 ˜

Listing 3: Example X12 Message [15]

not suffice to make data interchange of this type an operational reality. There is an equally important requirement to develop and agree on standards, procedures, and other essential elements of data handling methodologies to ensure intelligible communications between different systems used by trade and transport operators. The first steps in rationalization aiming at the use of automatic data processing and transmission were the development of agreed standards for the representation of data used to service international trade movements and of methods whereby the exchange of data between data processing systems would be made possible without the need for costly and error-prone re-transcription [39]. The principles for the establishment of any trade data interchange method or system may be summarized as follows: 1. The basis for any trade data interchange is the United Nations Trade Data Elements Directory (UNTDED), where data elements are uniquely named, tagged and defined, and where the representation of data entries is specified both as regards expression and syntax. From this directory, data elements required to fulfill specific documentary functions are selected both for UNLK based forms and to form messages for transmission. Data elements from UNTDED used in UN Standard Message types are also part of a separate directory (EDED) in UNTDID. 2. Data elements can be grouped in various sets, systematically arranged according to agreed rules. These groups (or ”segments”), which are designated by a common denominator (a segment tag), can be arranged as spec9

ified in United Nations Standard Message types (UNSM’s) or by agreement between interchange partners. Each data elements is implicitly identified by its position in the segment [39]. Definition of UN/EDIFACT At its meeting 1990-03, Working Party 4 agreed on the following definition of UN/EDIFACT: United Nations rules for Electronic Data Interchange For Administration, Commerce and Transport. They comprise a set of internationally agreed standards, directories and guidelines for the electronic interchange of structured data, and in particular that related to trade in goods and services between independent, computerized information systems. Recommended within the framework of the United Nations, the rules are approved and published by UN/ECE in the (this) United Nations Trade Data Interchange Directory (UNTDID) and are maintained under agreed procedures [39]. While companies may use the EDI standards to communicate. Banks, however, have agreed upon a standard to perform international transactions which is called SWIFT (see [25] for a short description). EDIFACT was created in order to reduce the number of interfaces between companies. Business processes which involve money transactions can be formulated in EDIFACT.[21]

2.5

XML/EDI

In 1998 an effort was made to develop a uniform protocol that could be used for platform independent data interchange that makes use of XML [22]. XML/EDI is the fusion of five technologies. • XML • EDI • Templates • Agents, and • Repository. This combination of capabilities makes XML/EDI so powerful. Each component adds unique tools that leverage the other pieces. In the past EDI was very static, today the XML/EDI framework provides is an exciting dynamic process that can be infinitely extended. The European counterpart is ISIS, European XML/EDI Pilot Project [16]. The Extensible Markup Language (XML) has been designed to provide a generic way of transferring data across the Internet without having to be constrained to the presentation rules built into the HyperText Markup Language (HTML) that currently forms the basis of data interchange over the World Wide Web (WWW). XML does not contain any predefined set of ’markup tags’ but allows users to define their own sets, based on the types of data they wish to interchange. There is an associated XML Stylesheet Language (XSL) that can be used, where appropriate, to exchange information on how each ’element’ of the transmitted data should be presented to users of the data. 10

For business communications there is a need for a globally understood set of business markup tags. The EDI standardization work for business-to-business messaging, notably UN/EDIFACT, has already identified a large set of exchangeable information objects, which provide a good starter set for defining business-related information objects for use within XML applications. XML/EDI is, however, wider in scope than just the use of existing semantic sets for business-to-business communications. There are many industries that are only just beginning to use electronic data interchange (EDI) or who are doing EDI but not using the UN/EDIFACT standards. It is anticipated that many of these will also adopt XML for interchange of data over the Internet. One of the roles of the XML/EDI work is, therefore, concerned with the integration of existing and emerging work with that done under the UN/EDIFACT procedures.

2.6

ebXML

UN/CEFACT and OASIS have developed ebXML [24] which provides a framework that aims at reducing interoperability issues and supports individual company processes. For over 25 years Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) has given companies the prospect of eliminating paper documents, reducing costs, and improving efficiency by exchanging business information in electronic form. Ideally, companies of all sizes could conduct eBusiness in a completely ad hoc fashion, without prior agreement of any kind. But this vision has not been realized with EDI; only large companies are able to afford to ebXML Technical Architecture Team February 2001 implement it, and much EDI-enabled eBusiness is centered around a dominant enterprise 188 that imposes proprietary integration approaches on its Trading Partners [11]. In the last few years, the Extensible Markup Language (XML) has rapidly become the first choice for defining data interchange formats in new eBusiness applications on the Internet. Many people have interpreted the XML groundswell as evidence that ’EDI is dead’ made completely obsolete by the XML upstart – but this view is nave from both business and technical standpoints. EDI implementations encode substantial experience in Business Processes, and companies with large investments in EDI integration will not abandon them without good reason. XML enables more open, more flexible business transactions than EDI. XML might enable more flexible and innovative ’eMarketplace’ business models than EDI. But the challenges of designing Messages that meet Business Process requirements and standardizing their semantics are independent of the syntax in which the Messages are encoded. The ebXML specifications provide a framework in which EDI’s substantial investments in Business Processes can be preserved in an architecture that exploits XML’s new technical capabilities. A critical view of ebXML is offered in [34]. The author analyses ebXML and concludes from his personal point of view that ebXML offers some avdantages and disadvantages. He points out that ebXML may suffer the same fate as EDI, i.e. to be accessible only to big companies that can invest into the implementation, and therefore being a standard only to the elite.

11

<anxs : i n t e r c h a n g e . h e a d er> <anxc : s y n t a x . i d e n t i f i e r > <anxe : s y n t a x . i d e n t i f i e r u n s l : c o d e=” 0 0 0 1 :UNOC”> UN/ECE l e v e l C </anxe : s y n t a x . i d e n t i f i e r > <anxe : s y n t a x . v e r s i o n . number> 2 </anxe : s y n t a x . v e r s i o n . number> </anxc : s y n t a x . i d e n t i f i e r > <anxc : i n t e r c h a n g e . s e n d e r > <anxe : s e n d e r . i d e n t i f i c a t i o n > S p r i n g e r −ILN </anxe : s e n d e r . i d e n t i f i c a t i o n > <anxe : r e c i p i e n t s . i d e n t i f i c a t i o n . q u a l i f e r u n s l : c o d e=” 0 0 0 7 : 9 1 ”> A s s i g n e d by s e l l e r or s e l l e r ’ s a g e n t </anxe : r e c i p i e n t s . i d e n t i f i c a t i o n . q u a l i f e r > </anxc : i n t e r c h a n g e . s e n d e r > <anxc : i n t e r c h a n g e . r e c i p i e n t > <anxe : r e c i p i e n t . i d e n t i f i c a t i o n > M i s s i n g Link </anxe : r e c i p i e n t . i d e n t i f i c a t i o n > <anxe : r e c i p i e n t s . i d e n t i f i c a t i o n . q u a l i f e r u n s l : c o d e=” 0 0 0 7 : 9 1 ”> A s s i g n e d by s e l l e r or s e l l e r ’ s a g e n t </anxe : r e c i p i e n t s . i d e n t i f i c a t i o n . q u a l i f e r > </anxc : i n t e r c h a n g e . r e c i p i e n t > <anxc : d a t e . t i m e . o f . p r e p a r a t i o n > <anxe : date> 980508 </anxe : date> <anxe : time> 1336 </anxe : time> </anxc : d a t e . t i m e . o f . p r e p a r a t i o n > <anxe : i n t e r c h a n g e . c o n t r o l . r e f e r e n c e > 4 </anxe : i n t e r c h a n g e . c o n t r o l . r e f e r e n c e > <anxe : t e s t . i n d i c a t o r u n s l : c o d e=” 0 0 3 5 : 1 ”> Interchange i s a test </anxe : t e s t . i n d i c a t o r > </anxs : i n t e r c h a n g e . h ea de r>

Listing 4: XML::EDIFACT Example

2.7

XML::EDIFACT

XML::Edifact is a perl module free available under GNU general public license, able to translate any well-formed UN/EDIFACT message into human readable and valid XML and vice versa, by using the original words from the UN/EDIFACT batch directories as markup and the defining document as namespace [20]. Even an approach to using RDF was undertaken within the same project [19]. However, the project seems to be incomplete or abandoned.

2.8

Verband der Automobilindustrie (VDA)

The German Verband der Automobilindustrie has defined some recommendations which unfortunately are not publicly available. However, it seems that the VDA has defined some message protocols as Figure 3 suggests. The annual report and the link to ordering applications can be found here [9].

12

2.9

STAR (Standards for Technology in Automotive Retail)

The STAR Group proposes voluntary standards, which are directed towards easy B2B communication. The STAR format is based upon Business Object Documents (BODs), special XML documents, which are described in detail in the reference implementation [36]. BODs prescribe a generic document structure which is capable of representing all messages that are necessary for B2B communication.

3

Bringing Together different Formats

This section presents two different solutions that address the problems that arise from the many proprietary EDI standards. Originally intended to be a standard for easy B2B data interchange EDI has evolved into many different formats as the sections above have shown. Some companies have realized this problem and offer a solution for companies that interchange data with different companies which use different EDI formats. Instead of developing a mapping between EDI formats themselves companies may use services, which are specialized in mapping between formats.

3.1

Covisint

Covisint provides services, which can be regarded as a ’hub’ [6]. Companies may submit their messages to a Covisint server which then transforms the message into the required destination format (see Figure 3).

Figure 3: Covisint as a Hub [6] Covisint claims to especially address the needs of the automotive industry. However, Figure 4 shows that OFTP is not yet implemented. Thus Covisint 13

Figure 4: Covisint Features [6] lacks the interface to an important European protocol (ODETTE FTP).

3.2

Redix

The Redix International company [35] offers a converter, which is capable of transforming different standards. The standards used in the automotive industry are included in the list of supported standards. Redix ”specializes in the development, marketing, and support of B2B, XML, DTD, Schema, X12, EDIFACT, EDI, HIPAA, NCPDP, HL7, and Electronic Commerce software” [35]. Redix offers Any-to-Any format conversion solutions to developers and companies for the implementation of profitable Electronic Commerce programs. The Redix Format Converter combines data security, translation, mapping, and database access into one process as opposed to the traditional four-step approach to eliminate unnecessary file I/O. Since the one-pass approach is much faster than other approaches, Redix Format Converter is ideal for real-time XML/EDI or Electronic Commerce applications. The newest version of the Redix AnyToAny XML Format Converter supports features like NCPDP, HL7, HIPAA pre-defined maps, and automatic database maps. Standards supported are: • X12: 3051, 4010, 4020, 4030, etc • EDIFACT: 93A, 93B, 94A, 94B, 95A, 95B, 96A, 96B, 97A, 97B, 98A, 98B, 99A, 99B, etc. • NCPDP: 5.1 • HL7: 2.3, 2.4, and XML versions • HIPAA: 4010, Addendum (A1) • UB92, NSF • HCFA 1500 and 1450 paper formats XML Standards supported are :

14

• RosettaNet Version 2.0 • OAG: Open Applications Group • FIXML: Financial Information eXchange • FPML: Financial Products Markup Language • MISMO: Mortgage Industry Standards Maintenance Organization • OTA: Open Travel Alliance • HL7: Version 2.3.1 • CIDX: Version 2.0.1 • PIDX: Petroleum Institute Petroleum Industry Data Exchange Version 1.0 • xCBL: Version 2.0, 3.5 • cXML: Version 1.1.008, 1.1.009, 1.1.010 Obviously Redix has put much effort into integrating many protocols. HL7 (Health Level 7 [41]), for example, is a standard in the health care arena. OFTP is not supported but neither does Redix claim to especially support the automotive industry.

4
4.1

Process and Data Management
Product Data Management (PDM)

Product Data Management is a framework that recommends the management of data and processes. The aim is to reduce the loss of information within a company an make best use of a company’s potential (synergy effects). [12, 40]

4.2

PDTnet

Increased challenges for suppliers and manufacturers in the automotive industry require the implementation of process-oriented and technical standards for product data communication. Today, companies in the manufacturing industry are forced to cooperate flexible with various partners in changing customer/supplier-roles in an international scope. Each relationship between development partners demands harmonization of organization-spanning processes, data formats and implementation methods. This emphasizes the relevance of standards in networked collaboration. New working techniques and workflows within the product development processes require increasing support of engineering tasks through CAx tools. The thereby generated product-describing data, has to be used continuously. Traditional modes of operation and business processes within the product development process are subject to a revolutionary change through novel communication technologies, especially in connection with the Internet. Within the scope of the PDTnet project particularly the following, commonly met problems were addressed: 15

• Scarcely harmonized processes hinder cross-organizational cooperation. • The implementation of customer-specific requirements (so-called bilateral optimization) leads to further segmentation and thus a loss of synergy, especially at the supplier. • Aged data and systems constrain the enforcement of new technologies. • Competing standards decelerate decisions and increase their price. • Organizational insecurities hamper the consequent use of technology, e.g. questions on data reliability, security aspects regarding the Internet, measures for data quality. A relocation of business processes to a network infrastructure poses great demands on the continuity of data and on data quality. • A relocation of business processes to a network infrastructure poses great demands on the continuity of data and on data quality. • The availability of know-how to master digital business processes is not distributed very well: well-informed experts in major enterprises meet contact persons from small- and medium-sized companies, whose core competence is not focussed on the area of information technology.

Figure 5: PDTnet Concept [32]

16

<?xml v e r s i o n=” 1 . 0 ” e n c o d i n g=”UTF−8”?> <P d t n e t s c h e m a xmlns : x s i=” h t t p : / /www. w3 . o r g /2001/XMLSchema−i n s t a n c e ” x s i : noNamespaceSchemaLocation=” p d t n e t s c h e m a v 1 1 . xsd ” id=” p d t n e t 1 ” v e r s i o n i d=” 1 . 1 ”> <Item id=” i 1 ”> <Id> 1 8 1 1 0 0 2 8 </Id> <Name> A i r b a g Modul L i n k s l e n k e r </Name> <I t e m v e r s i o n id=” i v 1 1 ”> <Id>V e r s i o n 1 </Id> < D e s i g n d i s c i p l i n e i t e m d e f i n i t i o n id=” d111 ” x s i : type=” A s s e m b l y d e f i n i t i o n ”> <Name> a s s e m b l y d e f i n i t i o n 1 </Name> <Id> ad111 </Id> < I n i t i a l c o n t e x t > a p p l i c a t i o n c o n t e x t 1 </ I n i t i a l c o n t e x t > <Document assignment id=” da1 ”> <A s s i g n e d d o c u m e n t> dv11 </A s s i g n e d d o c u m e n t> <Role>i n f o r m a t i v e </Role> </Document assignment> <A s s e m b l y c o m p o n e n t r e l a t i o n s h i p id=” nha1111 ” x s i : type=” N e x t h i g h e r a s s e m b l y ”> <R e l a t e d > s i 2 1 1 1 </R e l a t e d > </ A s s e m b l y c o m p o n e n t r e l a t i o n s h i p > <A s s e m b l y c o m p o n e n t r e l a t i o n s h i p id=” nha1112 ” x s i : type=” N e x t h i g h e r a s s e m b l y ”> <R e l a t e d > s i 3 1 1 1 </R e l a t e d > </ A s s e m b l y c o m p o n e n t r e l a t i o n s h i p > <A s s e m b l y c o m p o n e n t r e l a t i o n s h i p id=” nha1113 ” x s i : type=” N e x t h i g h e r a s s e m b l y ”> <R e l a t e d > s i 4 1 1 1 </R e l a t e d > </ A s s e m b l y c o m p o n e n t r e l a t i o n s h i p > </ D e s i g n d i s c i p l i n e i t e m d e f i n i t i o n > </ I t e m v e r s i o n > < A l i a s i d e n t i f i c a t i o n id=” a i 1 1 ”> <A l i a s i d > 6Q3 880 241 </ A l i a s i d > <A l i a s s c o p e > o1 </ A l i a s s c o p e > </ A l i a s i d e n t i f i c a t i o n > ... <A p p l i c a t i o n c o n t e x t id=” a p p l i c a t i o n c o n t e x t ”> <A p p l i c a t i o n d o m a i n > m e c h a n i c a l d e s i g n </A p p l i c a t i o n d o m a i n > < L i f e c y c l e s t a g e > d e s i g n </ L i f e c y c l e s t a g e > </ A p p l i c a t i o n c o n t e x t > </Pdtnet schema>

Listing 5: Example XML Document [31]

17

5

Comparison EDI and XML e-commerce

Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) is used by large companies for nearly twenty years now. For small companies it has proven itself to be too complicated and expensive. As a result, EDI has not been widely adopted. The Internet and XML have lowered the entry barriers to e-commerce, in both cost and complexity. Therefore business can be conducted in more affordable ways and so XML brings e-commerce to small and midsize companies. XML complements EDI and should not be interpreted as the end of EDI. XML e-commerce solution Optimized for easy programming Requires web server costing $0 to $5000 Uses your existing Internet connection EDI e-commerce solution Optimized for compressed messages Requires dedicated EDI server costing $10,000 to $100,000 Uses value-added network (VAN) charging $1 to $20 per message or more EDI message format takes months to master Requires highly trained C++ programmers

XML message format learned in hours Only requires JavaScript, Visual Basic, Python or Perl script writers

Table 1: XML and EDI e-commerce compared [17] An important advantage with regard to future development is that XML can be directly transmitted using Http, thus enabling the use by Web Services.

6

Semantic Web Technologies

So far XML is the only Semantic Web Technology that has been integrated into the automotive standards. XML::EDIFACT (see 2.7) is the only project that tries to integrate RDF. This section presents research projects that are concerned with using Semantic Web technologies in the automotive industry. Billig [3] describes the construction of a domain repository for automotive production using Semantic Web Technologies. RDF is used to model ontologies and defines TRIPLE as a language to query the repository. TRIPLE allows expressions in predicate logic but requires the RDF modell to be extended (RDF quadruple) and several extensions (e.g. modlets and actlets, text retrieval) to be added.

6.1

SIMI-Pro

Ucelli et al [10] describe their SIMI-Pro system which they claim allows easy, fast and centralized access to collections of data from multiple sources and in supporting the retrieval and re-use of a wide range of data that will help stylists and engineers shorten the production cycle. The idea is to describe processes as ontologies, thus augmenting the data with knowledge of the processes. This idea is depicted in Figure 6.

18

Figure 6: Semantic search mechanism as proposed in [10]

6.2

Corporate Ontology Grid (COG)

De Bruijn [7] points out that today’s Enterprise Application Integration (EAI) efforts are mostly made towards syntactic integration, totally ignoring semantic issues. His masters thesis is not directly concerned about problems of the automotive industry, but proposes a general approach to EAI using Semantic Web Technologies. The Corporate Ontology Grid (COG) [?] project makes use of an ontologybased central information model to provide explicit semantics and a unified view of all the company information. The Semantic Information Management (SIM) aims at overcoming the problems derived from the heterogeneity of the information stored in a given organization. The SIM uses a central ontology (the Information Model) and maps the individual sources to this central model. The SIM approach consists of three stages: • Collecting the metadata of the existing data sources • Creating a central ontology based on the metadata, capturing the semantics of the data stored in the different sources • Defining mappings between the original data schemas and the central ontology The Unicorn Workbench [38] by Unicorn supports all phases in the SIM. It is used for storage, management of the repository and performing all modeling and

19

semantic mapping tasks. Furthermore it helps validating and testing a model with test instances.

6.3

Solutions by Ontoprise GmbH at AUDI AG

Maier et al [1] introduce a method to map existing data, e.g. from relational data bases, to ontologies. For this purpose solutions by Ontoprise GmbH [13] where used to build a prototype at AUDI AG. This is supposed to be beneficial as all data sources are being mapped (using OntoMap by Ontoprise GmbH [13]) to one common ontology storage, where all knowledge is accumulated, allowing inferencing across data sources. In order to take advantage of inferencing relations have to be carefully modeled and rules defined for attributes and relations. During the prototype phase at AUDI, a part of an exhaust-gas system was modeled with all its dependencies. F-logic (frame logic) is used to create and query the ontologies, as it can be applied to the model and instance level of ontologies. OntoBroker by Ontoprise is used for inferencing from the predefined rules. OntoBroker consists of an inference engine which supports ontologies in common formats like RDF and OWL, as well as F-Logic. Furthermore OntoBroker contains an open framework for the connection of data sources like databases, document management systems, etc.. This approach is now under further development after been successfully tested at AUDI, especially regarding the aspect of storage, i.e. where and how to store the created ontologies efficiently.

6.4

Systems Analysis of Modelling and Validation of Renault Automobiles(SAMOVAR)

SAMOVAR (Systems Analysis of Modelling and Validation of Renault Automobiles) [18] is an interesting approach, using textual information as its knowledge base. A language tool (NOMINO [30])is used to populate predefined core ontology instances with information extracted from texts. Thus knowledge accumulated in past projects can be reused and consulted without having to have been already created as ontologies. Knowledge gained in past projects can be used as a ”project memory”. The tool CORESE (Conceptual Resource Search Engine) [14] is then used to find solutions in the knowledge base.

7

Summary

The automotive industry makes heavy use of EDI and its specializations. As EDI has its root in the 1970’s it is optimized for little bandwidth use and fast processing. Its complexity, however, makes it hard to deploy and the development of applications expensive. To make things even worse, industry branches or branches of different countries have developed their own protocols making it even harder for companies to implement full compatibility to global business partners. Apart from the approaches in section 3, the advantages of XML have been realized and efforts have been made to embrace those advantages. Many automotive organizations recognize that moving to an XML content infrastructure

20

improves the process of preparing, managing, and delivering customized content. Using XML to automate publishing processes and improve information quality reduces costs and publishing times. The usefulness of Semantic Web technologies is still being researched. Some of the presented projects already show the power of Semantic Web technologies in transforming different data sources and integrating them. The most interesting prospect in using Semantic Web technologies is the easy access to accumulated knowledge, which is one of the most important resources of a company.

References
[1] Andreas Maier, Hans-Peter Schnurr, York Sure. Ontology-based information integration in the automotive industry. [2] ASC X12C Communications and Controls Subcommittee. ASC X12 REFERENCE MODEL FOR XML DESIGN. WWW, 2002. http://www.x12.org/x12org/xmldesign/X12Reference Model For XML Design.pdf. [3] Andreas Billig. ODIS - Ein Domaenenrepository auf der Basis von Semantic Web Technologien. [4] Blueprint Electronic Commerce Ltd. Introduction to ODETTE. WWW. http://www.blueprint-ec.co.uk/odette.htm. [5] California State Board of Equalization. Example 1: Edi vessel/pipeline operator report data for pipeline a company. http://www.boe.ca.gov/elecsrv/efiling/pdf/exedi1-3.pdf. [6] Covisint. Covisint. WWW. http://www.covisint.com/. [7] Jos de Bruijn. Semantic Information Integration Inside and Across Organizational Boundaries. Master’s thesis, Digital Enterprise Research Institute (DERI), 2003. [8] Defense Reutilization and Marketing Service (DRMS). AMPLE OF A HAZARDOUS WASTE MATERIAL https://www.drms.dla.mil/drmsp/edi/861ex1drms.pdf. EDI EXRECEIPT.

[9] Verband der Automobilindustrie. Verffentlichungen. WWW. http://www.vda.de/en/service/sonstige veroeffentlichungen/index.html. [10] Dr. Giuliana Ucelli, Dr. Raffaele De Amicis, Dr. Giuseppe Conti, Prof. Fausto Giunchiglia and Dr. Stefan Noll. A SEMANTIC-BASED INFORMATION MANAGEMENT SYSTEM TO SUPPORT INNOVATIVE PRODUCT DESIGN. [11] ebXML. ebxml technical architecture specification v1.0.4, http://www.ebxml.org/specs/ebTA.pdf. 2001.

[12] Hewlett Packard. Introduction to Product Data Management (PDM). WWW. http://www.pdmic.com/undrstnd.html#brief. [13] http://www.ontoprise.de. Ontoprise gmbh. http://www.ontoprise.de. 21

[14] INRIA. Corese. WWW. http://www-sop.inria.fr/acacia/soft/corese/. [15] Interfaceware. Example X12 Message. http://www.interfaceware.com/manual/ch-3-2.html. [16] ISIS, European XML/EDI Pilot Project. http://palvelut.tieke.fi/edi/isis-xmledi/. XML/EDI, WWW. 2000. XML WWW.

[17] Jeffrey Ricker, Drew Munro, and Doug Hopeman. AND EDI PEACEFUL CO-EXISTENCE. http://www.tdan.com/i011hy01.htm.

[18] Joanna Golebiowska, Rose Dieng-Kuntz, Olivier Corby, Didier Mousseau. Building and exploiting ontologies for an automobile project memory. [19] Michael Koehne. RDF/EDIFACT. edifact.org/TR/RDF-Edifact-2.html. WWW. http://www.xml-

[20] Michael Koehne. Xml::edifact. WWW. http://www.xml-edifact.org/. [21] Stefan Krieg. Was ist edifact? http://www.zahlungsverkehrsfragen.de/edifact.html. WWW, 1999.

[22] Martin Bryan, Centre Benot, Marcha Norbert H Mikula, Bruce Peat, David RR Webber. Guidelines for using xml for electronic data interchange, 1998. http://www.eccnet.com/xmledi/guidelines-styled.xml. [23] National Institute of Standards and Technology. EDI Standard, 1993. http://www.itl.nist.gov/fipspubs/fip161-2.htm. [24] OASIS. ebXML. http://www.ebxml.org/. [25] ObjectEdge. The S.W.I.F.T. Framework. http://www.objectedge.com/archive-swift.qxd.pdf. [26] ODETTE. ODETTE. WWW. http://www.odette.org/. [27] ODETTE. ODETTE File Transfer Protocol OFTP (RFC 2204). http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2204.html. [28] Odette Espana. User & Access Managementin B2B Portals. WWW, 2004. http://www.odette.es/documentacion/normas/UAM Presentation July04.pdf. [29] ODETTE XML Project Group. ODETTE XML Recommendation, 2003. http://www.odette.org/html/xmlrecommendation.htm. [30] Pierre Plante, Lucie Dumas, Andr Plante. http://www.ling.uqam.ca/nomino/. Nomino. WWW. WWW, 1999.

[31] ProStep. PDTnet Implementation Guide. WWW, 2001. http://www.xml.org/xml/schema/cf38bfbb/PDTnetImplementationGuide v11.pdf. [32] ProSTEP iViP. http://www.prostep.org/de/stepportal/pdtnet/. WWW. http://www.prostep.org/de/stepportal/doku/. [33] Michael C. Rawlins. X12 tutorial. http://www.rawlinsecconsulting.com/x12tutorial/x12syn.html. 22 WWW.

[34] Michael C. Rawlins. ebXML - A Critical Analysis. WWW, 2002. http://www.rawlinsecconsulting.com/ebXML/index.html. [35] Redix. Redix Company. WWW. http://www.redix.com/. [36] STAR. XML Reference / Implementation Version 3.0. WWW. http://www.starstandard.org/sigs/tracking.cfm?track=/sigs/xml /current XML/STARXMLReferenceImplementation v3 0.pdf. [37] Tradanet. EDI Basics. WWW. http://www.tradanet.intnet.mu/EDIintro.htm. [38] Unicorn. Unicorn Workbench. http://www.unicorn.com/products/architecture.htm. [39] United Nations Economic Commission for Europe. UN/EDIFACT DRAFT DIRECTORY. http://www.unece.org/trade/untdid/texts/unrci.htm. [40] WAMware. Introduction to PDM. WWW. http://www.wamware.com/products/metakon/intro-to-pdm.htm. [41] www.hl7.org. Health level 7 (hl7). http://www.hl7.org/. [42] X12. ANSI ASC X 12. WWW. http://www.x12.org/.

23

Werkzeuge zur Visualisierung von Ontologien team@xml-clearinghouse.de www.xml-clearinghouse.de

Was ist das XML Clearinghouse?

Das XML Clearinghouse für Berlin und Brandenburg ermöglicht Wissenstransfer zu XML-Technologien durch öffentlich zugängliche Dienstleistungen. Es beobachtet, bereitet auf und vermittelt die Entwicklung von XML-Technologien und deren Anwendungen. Als Teilprojekt des regionalen Wachstumskerns <xmlcity:berlin> sorgt es für einen Wissenstransfer von der Forschung zur Anwendung in der Region Berlin und Brandenburg.

Ein Forum zum Wissenstransfer

Das XML Clearinghouse bietet Foren für Akteure aus Forschung, Wirtschaft und Intermediären zu gemeinsamen Aktivitäten. Ein Webportal ist Anlaufpunkt für XMLInformationen und regionalen Angeboten dazu. Fokussierte wissenschaftliche Workshops beleuchten aktuelle Themen, einzelne Entwicklungen werden in Schulungen didaktisch aufbereitet dargestellt. Die Vorträge im regelmäßigen XMLKolloquium berichten von neuen Entwicklungen und Anwendungen.

Workshops
In wissenschaftlichen Workshops werden in begutachteten Beiträgen neue Arbeiten mit XML-Bezug dargestellt. Diese Veranstaltungen finden mit Unterstützung unterschiedlicher Informatikgesellschaften, wie zum Beispiel der Fachgruppe Multimedia der Gesellschaft für Informatik, statt und haben dadurch einen hohen Stellenwert.

Schulungen

Eine Schulungsreihe dient dem Wissenstransfer zu XML-Technologien. Das XML Clearinghouse vermittelt ausgewählte XML-Themen in Tiefe und entwickelt dafür Schulungsmaterial.

Kolloquium

Das XML Clearinghouse bietet eine frei zugängliche Kolloquiumsreihe an, die abwechselnd an der FU Berlin und HU zu Berlin durchgeführt wird. Im Rahmen dieses Kolloquiums finden Vorträge und Diskussionen statt.

Web-Portal

Ergänzend zu den Veranstaltungen bietet das XML Clearinghouse eine öffentlich zugängliche Informationssammlung an. Gegenstand der Sammlung ist XMLTechnologie und deren Standardisierung und Anwendung. Das Webportal enthält insbesondere Informationen zu XML mit Bezug zu Berlin und Brandenburg.

team@xml-clearinghouse.de www.xml-clearinghouse.de

Reportreihe XML Clearinghouse: Im Rahmen des Projektes XML Clearinghouse für Berlin und Brandenburg sind die folgenden Reports bereits veröffentlicht worden:
Report 1 : XML-Standards in der Medizin Autor: Russell Watson Report 2 : XML-Security Standards Autor: Anja Jentzsch Report 3 : XML in Berlin und Brandenburg Autor: Richard Cyganiak Report 4 : VoiceXML Markt und Möglichkeiten Autor: Silvan Heintze Report 5 : Software zum Ontologiemanagement mit OWL Autor: Sebastian Tietz Report 6 : Speicherverfahren und Werkzeuge für RDF/S Autor: Jan Große Report 7 : Technologien des Semantic Web Autor: Alexander Hölßig Report 8 : Recruitment Autor: Christian Bizer, Malgorzata Mochol, Daniel Westphal Report 9 : Semantisches Matching Autor: Maren Lenk Report 10 : RFID and the Semantic Web Autor: Franziska Liebsch Report 11 : Visualisierung von Ontologien Autor: Maren Lenk Report 12 : Tourism Standards Autor: Anja Jentzsch Report 13 : Product classification and descriptions in the range of food Autor: Susanne Richter

Master your semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Special offer for students: Only $4.99/month.

Master your semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Cancel anytime.