TOWARDS THE FORMALISATION OF THE TOGAF CONTENT METAMODEL USING ONTOLOGIES

Aurona Gerber, Paula Kotzé, Alta van der Merwe

Abstract

Metamodels are abstractions that are used to specify characteristics of models. Such metamodels are generally included in specifications or framework descriptions. A metamodel is for instance used to inform the generation of enterprise architecture content in the Open Group’s TOGAF 9 Content Metamodel description. However. the description of metamodels is usually done in an ad-hoc manner with customised languages and this often results in ambiguities and inconsistencies. We are concerned with the question of how the quality of metamodel descriptions, specifically within the enterprise architecture domain, could be enhanced. Therefore we investigated whether formal ontology technologies could be used to enhance metamodel construction, specification and design. For this research, we constructed a formal ontology for the TOGAF 9 Content Metamodel, and in the process, gained valuable insight into metamodel quality. In particular, the current TOGAF 9 Content Metamodel contains ambiguities and inconsistencies, which could be eliminated using ontology technologies. In this paper we argue for the integration of formal ontologies and ontology technologies as tools into metamodel construction and specification. Ontologies allow for the construction of complex conceptual models, but more significant, ontologies can assist an architect by depicting all the consequences of a model, allowing for more precise and complete artifacts within enterprise architectures, and because these models use standardized languages, they should promote integration and interoperability.

References

  1. Avison, D. and Fitzgerald, G. (2003). Information Systems Development: Methodologies, Techniques and Tools. McGraw-Hill, UK, third edition.
  2. Baader, F., Calvanese, D., McGuinness, D., Nardi, D., and Patel-Schneider, P. (2003). The Description Logic Handbook: Theory, Implementation, and Applications. Cambridge University Press.
  3. Benson, T. (2009). Principles of Health Interoperability HL7 and SNOMED. Springer (http://www.springer.com).
  4. Berners-Lee, T., Hendler, J., and Lassila, O. (2001). The semantic web. Scientific American, 284(5):34-43.
  5. Bézivin, J. (2003). On the unification power of models. In UML'2003. http://atlanmod.emn.fr/www/papers/ OnTheUnificationPowerOfModels.pdf.
  6. Broekstra, J., Klein, M., Decker, S., Fensel, D., van Harmelen, F., and Horrocks, I. (2001). Enabling knowledge representation on the web by extending rdf schema. In Proceedings of the 10th International World Wide Web Conference (WWW10), Hong Kong, volume ACM 1-58113-348-0/01/0005, page 467. last accessed 18/3/2006.
  7. Bussler, C., Fensel, D., and Maedche, A. (2002). A conceptual architecture for semantic web enabled web services. ACM SIGMOD, SPECIAL ISSUE: Special section on semantic web and data management, 31, issue 4:24 - 29.
  8. Campbell, A. (2009). Enterprise architecture: From strategy to execution. meta model post. Wiki. Accessed January 2010 at http://iea.wikidot.com/.
  9. Decker, S., Melnik, S., van Harmelen, F., Fensel, D., Klein, M., Broekstra, J., Erdmann, M., and Horrocks, I. (2000). The semantic web: The roles of xml and rdf. IEEE Internet Computing, 4:63-74.
  10. Dijkstra, E. W. (2001). The end of computing science? Communications of the ACM, 44(3):92.
  11. EARF (2009). Definition of enterprise tecture. Retrieved January, 2010, http://earf.meraka.org.za/earfhome/defining-ea/.
  12. Ernst, A. M., Lankes, J., Schweda, C. M., and Wittenburg, A. (2006). Tool support for enterprise architecture management - strenghts and weaknesses. In 10th IEEE International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference, Hong Kong., pages 13 - 22.
  13. Ernst, J. (2002). What is metamodeling, and what is it good for? wIKI. http://infogrid.org/wiki/Reference/ WhatIsMetaModeling.
  14. Fact++ (2009). Fact++ ontology reasoner. Web.
  15. GITOC (2009). Government wide enterprise architecture (gwea) framework. GITOC Website.
  16. Gómez-Pérez, A., Fernández-L ópez, M., and Chorco, O. (2004). Ontological Engineering. Springer.
  17. Grüber, T. (1993). A translation approach to portable ontology specifications. Knowledge Acquisition, 5:199- 220.
  18. Hahn, U. and Schulz, S. (2007). Ontological foundations for biomedical sciences. Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, 39(3):179-182.
  19. HL7 (2009). Health level seven. HL7 Website. Retrieved on 5 January 2010 from http://www.hl7.org/.
  20. Horridge, M. (2009). A practical guide to building owl ontologies using protégé 4 and co-ode tools: Edition 1.2. WWW.
  21. Horrocks, I. (2007). Semantic web: the story so far. In W4A 7807: Proceedings of the 2007 international crossdisciplinary conference on Web accessibility (W4A), pages 120-125, New York, NY, USA. ACM.
  22. IEEE (2000). Recommended practie for architectural description of software-intensive systems. IEEE Report.
  23. Janssen, M. and Hjort-Madsen, K. (2007). Analyzing enterprise architecture in national governments: The cases of denmark and the netherlands. In Proceedings of the 40th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, pages 1530-1605.
  24. Kaisler, S., Armour, F., and Valivullah, M. (2005). Enterprise architecting: Critical problems. In 38th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Hawaii, USA.
  25. Kalyanpur, A., Parsia, B., Sirin, E., Cuenca-Grau, B., and Hendle, J. (2005). Swoop: A Web Ontology Editing Browser.
  26. Kim, J.-W., Kim, Y.-G., Kwon, J.-H., Hong, S.-H., Song, C.-Y., and Baik, D.-K. (2005). An enterprise architecture framework based on a - common information technology domain (eafit) for improving interoperability among heterogeneous information systems. In Third ACIS Int'l Conference on Software Engineering Research, Management and Applications, Central Michigan University, Mount Pleasant, Michigan, USA.
  27. Lassila, O. and McGuinness, D. L. (2001). The role of frame-based representation on the semantic web. Technical report, Knowledge Systems Laboratory Report KSL-01-02, Stanford University.
  28. Lippitt, G. L. (1973). Visualizing Change: Model Building and the Change Process. University Associates, Inc.
  29. McGuinness, D. L. and van Harmelen, F. (2004). Owl web ontology language overview. W3C Web site. Last accessed 13/9/2006.
  30. OMG (2008). Software process engineering metamodel. OMG Website. Retrieved 4 January 2010 from http://www.omg.org/technology/documents/ formal/spem.htm.
  31. Palmer, S. B. (2001). The semantic web: An introduction. W3C Web site. Last accessed 16/9/2006.
  32. Pellet (2009). Pellet: The open source owl dl reasoner. Web.
  33. Pidcock, W. (2002). What are the differences between a vocabulary, a taxonomy, a thesaurus, an ontology, and a meta-model? Wiki. http://infogrid.org/wiki/Reference/PidcockArticle.
  34. Protégé (2009). The protégé http://protege.stanford.edu/.
  35. Rood, M. (1994). Enterprise architecture: definition, content and utility. In Third Workshop on Enabling Technologies: Infrastructure for Collaborative Enterprises, Morgantown, West Virginia.
  36. Session, R. (2007). A comparison of the top four enterprisearchitecture methodologies, building distributed application. Web.
  37. Sirin, E., Parsia, B., Grau, B. C., Kalyanpur, A., and Katz, Y. (2007). Pellet: A practical OWL-DL reasoner. Journal of Web Semantics, 5(2).
  38. Suntisrivaraporn, B., Baader, F., Schulz, S., and Spackman, K. (2007). Replacing SEP-Triplets in SNOMED CT using Tractable Description Logic Operators. In Proceedings of AIME 2007.
  39. SWOOP (2009). Swoop - semantic web ontology editor. Web.
  40. The Open Group (2009a). The open group. The Open Group Website. http://www.opengroup.org/.
  41. The Open Group (2009b). TOGAF 9: The Open Group Architecture Framework (TOGAF). Document Number: G091. http://www.opengroup.org/architecture/togaf9- doc/arch/.
  42. W3C (2006). The world wide web consortium (w3c). W3C Web site.
  43. Walker, M. (2009). Togaf 9 release and impressions. Blog. Accessed January 2010 from http://blogs.msdn.com/mikewalker/archive/2009/02/ 02/togaf-9-release-and-impressions.aspx.
  44. Weiner, L. H. (1978). The roots of structured programming. In Papers of the SIGCSE/CSA technical symposium on Computer science education, pages 243-254, New York, NY, USA. ACM Press.
  45. Wolstencroft, K., Brass, A., Horrocks, I., Lord, P., Sattler, U., Stevens, R., and Turi, D. (2005). A little semantic web goes a long way in biology. In Proceedings of the 2005 International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC 2005), LNAI. Springer.
  46. Yang, W.-Y., Lee, L.-H., Gien, H.-L., Chu, H.-Y., Chou, Y.- T., and Liou, D.-M. (2009). The design of the hl7 rim-based sharing components for clinical information systems. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, 53.
  47. Zachman, J. (2003). The Zachman Framework for Enterprise Architecture. a primer for enterprise engineering and manufacturing. Zachman International.
  48. Zachman, J. A. (1997). Enterprise architecture: The issue of the century. Database Programming and Design Magazine. http://www.cioindex.com/nm/articlefiles/63503- EAIssueForTheCenturyZachman.pdf.
Download


Paper Citation


in Harvard Style

Gerber A., Kotzé P. and van der Merwe A. (2010). TOWARDS THE FORMALISATION OF THE TOGAF CONTENT METAMODEL USING ONTOLOGIES . In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems - Volume 2: ICEIS, ISBN 978-989-8425-05-8, pages 54-64. DOI: 10.5220/0002903200540064


in Bibtex Style

@conference{iceis10,
author={Aurona Gerber and Paula Kotzé and Alta van der Merwe},
title={TOWARDS THE FORMALISATION OF THE TOGAF CONTENT METAMODEL USING ONTOLOGIES},
booktitle={Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems - Volume 2: ICEIS,},
year={2010},
pages={54-64},
publisher={SciTePress},
organization={INSTICC},
doi={10.5220/0002903200540064},
isbn={978-989-8425-05-8},
}


in EndNote Style

TY - CONF
JO - Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems - Volume 2: ICEIS,
TI - TOWARDS THE FORMALISATION OF THE TOGAF CONTENT METAMODEL USING ONTOLOGIES
SN - 978-989-8425-05-8
AU - Gerber A.
AU - Kotzé P.
AU - van der Merwe A.
PY - 2010
SP - 54
EP - 64
DO - 10.5220/0002903200540064