Stéphane Jean, Guy Pierra, Yamine Ait-Ameur


If the word ontology is more and more used in a number of domain, the capabilities and benefits of ontology for Information Systems management are still unclear. Therefore, the usage of ontology-based Information Systems in industry and services is not widespread. This paper analyses the concept of a domain ontology from a database perspective. As a result, firstly, we provide three criteria that distinguish domain ontology from other existing domain modeling approach which lead us to propose a new definition of domain ontologies. Secondly, based on the various approaches of ontology modeling followed by different communities, we propose a taxonomy of domain ontology. We show how they may be organized into a layered model, called the onion model, allowing to design and to use the capabilities of each category of ontology in an integrated environment. Finally, this paper presents several information systems based on ontology technologies and describe the kinds of services that should be provided to allow a powerful usage of ontology in data management.


  1. Bechhofer, S., van Harmelen, F., Hendler, J., Horrocks, I., McGuinness, D. L., Patel-Schneider, P. F., and Stein, L. A. (2004). OWL Web Ontology Language Reference. World Wide Web Consortium.
  2. Bellatreche, L., Pierra, G., Xuan, D. N., Hondjack, D., and Ait-Ameur, Y. (2004). An a priori approach for automatic integration of heterogeneous and autonomous databases. In DEXA, pages 475-485.
  3. Bozsak, E., Ehrig, M., Handschuh, S., Hotho, A., Maedche, A., Motik, B., Oberle, D., Schmitz, C., Staab, S., Stojanovic, L., Stojanovic, N., Studer, R., Stumme, G., Sure, Y., Tane, J., Volz, R., and Zacharias, V. (2002). Kaon - towards a large scale semantic web. In EC-WEB 7802: Proceedings of the Third International Conference on E-Commerce and Web Technologies, pages 304-313, London, UK. Springer-Verlag.
  4. Brickley, D. and Guha, R. (2004). RDF Vocabulary Description Language 1.0: RDF Schema. World Wide Web Consortium.
  5. Chawathe, S. S., Garcia-Molina, H., Hammer, J., Ireland, K., Papakonstantinou, Y., Ullman, J. D., and Widom, J. (1994). The tsimmis project: Integration of heterogeneous information sources. In IPSJ, pages 7-18.
  6. Cullot, N., Parent, C., Spaccapietra, S., and Vangenot, C. (2003). Ontologies : A contribution to the dl/db debate. In SWDB, pages 109-129.
  7. Das, S., Chong, E. I., Eadon, G., and Srinivasan, J. (2004). Supporting ontology-based semantic matching in rdbms. In VLDB, pages 1054-1065.
  8. Dou, D., McDermott, D., and Qi, P. (2003). Ontology translation on the semantic web. In Proceeding of the 2nd International Conference on Ontologies, Databases and Applications of Semantics, (ODBASE'2003), pages 952-969.
  9. Gangemi, A., Guarino, N., Masolo, C., and Oltramari, A. (2003). Sweetening wordnet with dolce. AI Magazine, 24(3):13-24.
  10. Gruber, T. R. (1993). A translation approach to portable ontology specifications. Knowl. Acquis., 5(2):199-220.
  11. Guarino, N. and Welty, C. (2002). Evaluating ontological decisions with ontoclean. Commun. ACM, 45(2):61- 65.
  12. Haarslev, V. and Möller, R. (2001). Racer system description. In IJCAR 7801: Proceedings of the First International Joint Conference on Automated Reasoning, pages 701-706. Springer-Verlag.
  13. IEC61360-4 (1999). Standard data element types with associated classification scheme for electric components - part 4 : Iec reference collection of standard data element types, component classes and terms. Technical report, International Standards Organization.
  14. ISO10303 (1994). Initial release of international standard(is) 10303. Technical report is 10303, International Standards Organization.
  15. ISO13584-42 (1998). Industrial automation systems and integration parts library part 42 : Description methodology : Methodology for structuring parts families. Technical report, International Standards Organization.
  16. Jarrar, M. and Meersman, R. (2002). Formal ontology engineering in the dogma approach. In On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems, 2002 - DOA/CoopIS/ODBASE 2002 Confederated International Conferences DOA, CoopIS and ODBASE 2002, pages 1238- 1254. Springer-Verlag.
  17. Kifer, M., Lausen, G., and Wu, J. (1995). Logical foundations of object-oriented and frame-based languages. J. ACM, 42(4):741-843.
  18. Meersman, R. (2001). Ontologies and databases: More than a fleeting resemblance. In OES/SEO Workshop Rome. (2001).
  19. Niles, I. and Pease, A. (2001). Towards a standard upper ontology. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Formal Ontology in Information Systems (FOIS-2001), pages 2-9.
  20. Noy, N. F. and McGuinness, D. L. (2001). Ontology development 101: A guide to creating your first ontology. Technical report ksl-01-05 and stanford medical informatics technical report smi-2001-0880, Stanford Knowledge Systems Laboratory.
  21. Pan, Z. and Heflin, J. (2003). Dldb: Extending relational databases to support semantic web queries. In PSSS.
  22. Parent, C., Spaccapietra, S., and Zimanyi, E. (1999). Spatio-temporal conceptual models: data structures + space + time. In GIS 7899: Proceedings of the 7th ACM international symposium on Advances in geographic information systems, pages 26-33. ACM Press.
  23. Pierra, G. (2003). Context-explication in conceptual ontologies: The plib approach. In Jardim-Gonalves, R., Cha, J., and Steiger-Garao, A., editors, Proceedings of the 10th ISPE International Conference on Concurrent Engineering (CE 2003), pages 243-254.
  24. Pierra, G., Dehainsala, H., Aït-Ameur, Y., and Bellatreche, L. (2005). Base de données à base ontologique : principes et mise en oeuvre. Ingénierie des Systèmes d'Information, 10(2):91-115.
  25. Rousset, M.-C., Bidault, A., Froidevaux, C., Gagliardi, H., Goasdou, F., Reynaud, C., and Safar, B. (2002). Construction de médiateurs pour intégrer des sources d'information multiples et hétérogènes: Picsel. revue I3, 2(1):9-59.
  26. Tetlow, P., Pan, J., Oberle, D., Wallace, E., Uschold, M., and Kendall, E. (2005). Ontology Driven Architectures and Potential Uses of the Semantic Web in Systems and Software Engineering. World Wide Web Consortium.
  27. Uschold, M. and Jasper, R. (1999). A framework for understanding and classifying ontology applications.
  28. In Proceedings of the IJCAI99 Workshop on Ontologies and Problem-Solving Methods(KRR5), Stockholm, Sweden, (August 1999).
  29. Visser, P. R. S., Beer, M. D., Bench-Capon, T. J. M., Diaz, B. M., and Shave, M. J. R. (1999). Resolving ontological heterogeneity in the kraft project. In Database and Expert Systems Applications, 10th International Conference, DEXA 7899, pages 668-677.
  30. Wiederhold, G. (1991). Obtaining information from heterogeneous systems. In Proceedings of the First Workshop on Information Technologies and Systems (WITS'91), pages 1-8. Cambridge MA, MIT Sloan School of Management.

Paper Citation

in Harvard Style

Jean S., Pierra G. and Ait-Ameur Y. (2006). DOMAIN ONTOLOGIES: A DATABASE-ORIENTED ANALYSIS . In Proceedings of WEBIST 2006 - Second International Conference on Web Information Systems and Technologies - Volume 1: WEBIST, ISBN 978-972-8865-46-7, pages 341-351. DOI: 10.5220/0001246203410351

in Bibtex Style

author={Stéphane Jean and Guy Pierra and Yamine Ait-Ameur},
booktitle={Proceedings of WEBIST 2006 - Second International Conference on Web Information Systems and Technologies - Volume 1: WEBIST,},

in EndNote Style

JO - Proceedings of WEBIST 2006 - Second International Conference on Web Information Systems and Technologies - Volume 1: WEBIST,
SN - 978-972-8865-46-7
AU - Jean S.
AU - Pierra G.
AU - Ait-Ameur Y.
PY - 2006
SP - 341
EP - 351
DO - 10.5220/0001246203410351