BUSINESS RULES ELICITATION IN THE PROCESS OF
ENTERPRISE INFORMATION SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT
Olegas Vasilecas, Diana Bugaite
Vilnius Gediminas Techical University, Saulėtekio al.11, Vilnius – 40, LT-10223 Lithuania
Keywords: Business rule, event, ECA rule, ontology, business system, information system, software system.
Abstract: The paper considers the problems of events modelling in the process of developing business rule-based
information systems and determines their significance. The concepts of a rule and an event are defined at
different levels of abstraction (business system, information system and software system). According to the
suggested definitions of business event, event in the information system and software event, the abstraction
levels of modelling are extended by the rule and event modelling facilities and their propagation into the
lower levels of an enterprise system. Since ontology represents the real-world domain knowledge and events
as well as business rules, making a specific part of all domain knowledge, it is suggested to use ontology as
an extra source to improve elicitation of business rules and events.
1 INTRODUCTION
Enterprise information systems (IS) are central for
any enterprise because they capture and store the
information required to support business processes
and ensure the execution of these business processes
at an enterprise. Information processing rules are
used in IS to process the required information
correctly. These information processing rules are
derived from business rules (BR).
In practice, information processing rules are
implemented by active DBMS SQL triggers.
Information processing rules should be expressed
as ECA (event-condition-action) rules to be
implemented by active DBMS SQL triggers.
Therefore it is necessary to determine and elicit rules
from the application domain and develop ECA rules.
An event is an important component of an ECA
rule, since event specification and linking them to
corresponding rules enable us to automate rules
triggering. Moreover, system is not overloaded
during the rule execution every time when an event
occurs.
IS, which can perform operations automatically,
e.g., respond to events inside or outside a system, are
called either a reactive IS or active IS.
The objective of this paper is to investigate how
events, making an important part of ECA rules, are
modelled in the process of BR-based IS
development.
Since ontology represents the real-world domain
knowledge, events and rules, making a specific part
of all domain knowledge, it can be used to form a set
of ECA rules.
2 RELATED WORK
The development of an enterprise system requires
that systems operating at all enterprise levels
(business, information, and software) would share a
common conceptualisation. A business system (BS)
of an enterprise depends to a large extent on the
supporting IS and a software system (SS). Therefore
changes in the BS result in the changes of the IS and
SS (Caplinskas, 2002).
BRs make an important part of business and exist
at the BS level. Any changes in BRs at this level
should be reflected at the lower level systems of an
enterprise.
A definition of a BR depends on the context in
which it is used. From the BS perspective, a BR is a
statement that defines or constrains some aspects of
a particular business. These BRs are actually derived
from business policies. They are created to constrain
the actions at the enterprise. At the BS level, BRs
are expressed in a declarative manner. (Bugaite,
218
Vasilecas O. and Bugaite D. (2006).
BUSINESS RULES ELICITATION IN THE PROCESS OF ENTERPRISE INFORMATION SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT.
In Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems - ISAS, pages 218-223
DOI: 10.5220/0002496302180223
Copyright
c
 SciTePress

2005). For example: A customer could not buy more
than credit limit permits.
From the perspective of IS, a BR is a statement,
which defines the major rules of information
processing using a rule-based language (Lebedys,
2004). For example: “Total Value” of an ORDER
could not be greater than the “Credit Limit” of a
CUSTOMER (Hay, 1999).
At the execution level (or SS level), rules are
statements that are transferred to the executable
rules, like active DBMS triggers.
In this paper, the emphasis is placed on the BRs,
which are directly related to the reactive behaviour
of active ISs. These BRs fall under the ECA
paradigm (when event occurs, if condition is true,
then action). Note, that the BRs of only this category
are discussed.
However, in the application domain or ontology,
to which the BRs belong (see Figure 1), they are not
always expressed in terms of ECA rules.
Some of these BRs have explicit or implicit
condition and action parts. The missing condition
can always be substituted with a default condition
state as TRUE. Some BR may have no explicit
action since they can state what kind of transition
from one data state to another is not admissible.
(Valatkaite, 2004)
But the majority of these BRs do not define
explicitly or implicitly the event. Therefore, it is not
clear, when a BR, the consequent information
processing and executable rules have been triggered.
There are the following ways to trigger rules:
▪ A system triggers all rules every time, when
any related event occurs.
▪ A user triggers rules, when he/she decides that
it is necessary.
▪ A user defines the events, which trigger rules.
In this paper the third way was used for rule
triggering, because, as mentioned above, events
allow the specification and implementation of the
reactive behaviour of a system. The specification of
the events and their linking to actual rules enabling
the system automatically react to the defined events
and perform the defined operations, e.g. automatic
rule triggering. System is not overloaded during the
rule execution every time when an event occurs.
A method of the BRs elicitation from the
application domain problems is described in
(Bugaite, 2005).
The one possible solution proposed to solve the
defined problems was using of the domain ontology.
Since ontology represents the real-world domain
knowledge, events and BRs, making a specific part
of all domain knowledge, it can be used to form a set
of BRs (Bugaite, 2005).
The analysis of the ontology concept was made
in (Bugaite, 2005). Therefore, only a definition of
the ontology suggested by these authors is presented
in this paper.
Ontology is a specification of a
conceptualisation. Ontology defines the basic terms
and their relationships, comprising the vocabulary of
an application domain and the axioms.
Ontology axioms (and ontology as a whole)
represented in a formal way can be used to elicit
BRs. The ontology axioms can be transformed into
BRs, while the BRs can be transformed into
information processing rules and latter can be
transformed into executable rules. (Bugaite, 2005)
The analysis of ontology axioms shows, that
axioms have clearly defined action(s) and,
sometimes, condition(s). Event is not defined
because axioms define the state in which an
application domain should be. However, no
information is provided about what should be done
to implement a desirable state. (Bugaite, 2005).
Therefore, it is necessary to investigate events and
ways of their modelling.
2.1 Events and Their Modelling in
IS Development
In IS development, the concept of event means the
occurrence of happening of interest in the
application domain (Adaikkalavan, 2003; Michiels,
2003; Cilia, 2002).
Events can be either primitive (e.g., depositing
cash in bank) or composite (e.g., depositing cash in
bank, followed by withdrawal of cash from bank).
Primitive events occur at a point in time (i.e. time of
depositing). They are a finite set of events that are
pre-defined in the domain of interest. Composite
events occur over an interval (i.e. interval starts at
the time cash is deposited and ends when cash is
Domain-Specific
Ontology
Other
Enterprise
Sources
Enterprise
Business Rules
More
General
Ontology
Figure 1: Sources of Business Rules.
BUSINESS RULES ELICITATION IN THE PROCESS OF ENTERPRISE INFORMATION SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT
219

withdrawn). They consist of several primitive
events. (Adaikkalavan, 2003).
Events reflect how information and objects come
into existence, how information and objects are
modified, and how they disappear from our universe
of discourse (Michiels, 2003).
An event driven system is a system in which
actions result from business events. BRs determine
what these events are and under what conditions
they can lead to some particular actions. Any action
may constitute a new business event. (Johnston,
2004; OMG, 2005).
Software events are messages in the IS that
describe a business event. Software events are
generated by an application program or some other
software. (Weigand, 2005). Event allows an
application to signal that something of importance
has happened (Lockhart, 2005).
The main concepts in event-driven business
models are the business entity, business event,
business process, business activity and BR. So the
basic building blocks are the business process and
the business entity. The two are ‘wired together’ by
a flow of actions from process to entity, and by a
flow of events from entity to process. In a
component framework, therefore, business processes
have event inflow and action outflow, and entities
have action inflow and event outflow. (OMG, 2005).
In (Cilia, 2005) the shared terms defined in
common vocabularies, or ontologies, are used as the
basis for the correct interpretation of events coming
from different sources. An event is represented as
triplet of the form < C; v; S >, with C referring to a
concept from the underlying ontology or vocabulary,
v standing for the actual data value, and S
representing the semantic context of v. This semantic
context consists of a variable set that explicitly
describe implicit modelling assumptions. For
example, the event PostNewPackageOffer can be
described by the attributes FromDate, UntilDate,
Accommodation, PackagePrice, e.g. (Cilia, 2005;
Siorpaes, 2004).
In (Cilia, 2002) events are classified as follows.
DB events refer to the data modification (like SQL
operations INSERT, DELETE and UPDATE) and
data retrieval in the DB (like selection in a relational
DB, the fetch of an object in an OODB).
Transaction events refer to the different stages of
transaction execution, e.g. begin transaction,
Enterprise System
Business
Systems
Business
Information
Systems
Software
Systems
Support
Support
Business
Systems
Information
Systems
Software
Systems
Business Rules
Expressed in a
Declarative
Manner
Information
Processing
Rules
Expressed in
a Rule-Based
Language
Executable
Rules
Business
Events
Events in
Informatio
n System
Software
Events
Figure 2: The structure of an enterprise system.
Figure 3: Events and rules in business, information and software systems.
ICEIS 2006 - INFORMATION SYSTEMS ANALYSIS AND SPECIFICATION
220

commit, rollback, etc. Temporal events refer to time.
Abstract events or application-defined events are
signalled explicitly by the application, e.g.
AuctionCancelled.
According to (Mahesh, 1996; Humphreys, 1997)
knowledge about events is represented by ontology
as well. Events are modelled by the terms defined in
the domain ontology. Sometimes, special event
ontologies are created for events in a certain
application domain modelling. But these so-called
event ontologies do not exist alone. They usually are
related to term (or so-called context) ontologies of
the same domain. (Yu, 2001). For the sake of
simplicity, the first case is used in this paper.
Entity life cycle is widely used in a variety of
methodologies to represent changes that happen over
time (most of the other techniques represent static
views of a system). The objective of entity life cycle
analysis is to identify the various possible states that
entity can legitimately be in. An event is always a
starting point, which sets the entity into its initial
state. (Avison, 2003).
3 AN APPROACH TO EVENT
MODELLING IN IS
DEVELOPMENT
The structure of an enterprise system described by
(Caplinskas, 2002) was extended by rule and event
facilities to determine the propagation of BRs and
events to lower levels of an enterprise system and to
show the formation of rules and events at different
levels of abstraction (Figure 2).
BRs and business events make an important part
of business and exist at the BS level. Any changes in
the BRs and business events at this level should be
reflected at the lower level of an enterprise system.
Executable rules implement information
processing rules, while information processing rules
implement the BRs. Software events implement the
events in IS, whereas the events in IS implement
business events. Therefore, the BRs can be mapped
into information processing rules, while the
information processing rules can be mapped or
transformed into executable rules (like SQL triggers
in ADBMS). The business event can be mapped into
events in IS, while the events in IS can be mapped or
transformed into software events.
The structure of an enterprise system in Figure 2
is going to be used in further research of events
modelling in the process of developing BR-based IS.
In the analysis of the related work the authors do
not explicitly define a particular level of abstraction
because only one level of abstraction is considered.
According to the levels of abstraction, all events
can be classified into business events, events in IS
and software events. It is necessary to differentiate
between business events, events in IS and software
events to ensure consistent and complete modelling
and implementation of these events. First, events at
the BS level have to be analysed and modelled,
second – events in IS and finally – software events
should be handled.
For this purpose business events, events in IS
and software events can be defined in the following
way according to the related works presented above:
A business event is a significant occurrence or a
happening of interest in the application domain. An
example of a business event can be a customer
order, the arrival of a shipment at a loading dock, or
a truck breakdown. A business event activates a
business process. In particular situations, the ending
of a business process can cause a new business
event.
An event in IS is generated by an IS. It is the
implementation of the business event. One business
event can be implemented by one or several events
in IS. An example of an event in IS can be a method
execution by an object.
A software event is generated by a SS. An
example of a software event can be SELECT,
CREATE, UPDATE, DELETE and others.
However, not all information processing rules
and events in IS come from a BS. Some of them
came from an IS.
According to the above definitions, the
modelling abstraction levels described by
(Caplinskas, 2002) were extended by rule and event
modelling facilities and their propagation into lower
levels of enterprise system (Figure 3).
A software event activates the particular action
processing. In some cases, it can trigger particular
rules (ECA rules). Rule execution incorporates
condition evaluation and action execution. First, the
condition is evaluated (checked) and if it is true, the
action or some actions are executed. These actions
can cause another software event, and so on. A
possible event-driven process chain in the SS is
shown in Fig. 4 (Nüttgens, 1997; Cilia, 2002).
In this work, an assumption is made that a digital
process consists of one or several actions in SS.
Ontology of an enterprise (or, in general, a
domain ontology) is above the enterprise system.
Some propositions presented above will be
repeated below to draw some inferences.
BUSINESS RULES ELICITATION IN THE PROCESS OF ENTERPRISE INFORMATION SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT
221

Ontology axioms can be transformed into the
business rules, while the BR can be transformed into
information processing rules and the information
processing rules can be transformed into executable
rules.
Events in domain ontology are modelled by the
terms defined in this domain ontology. Ontology
events are more general or the same as business
events, for example, a customer order, a particular
meeting…
3.1 A Case Study of Ontology
Axioms and Events
Transformation into the ECA
Rules
The ontology for a particular business enterprise was
created using Protégé-2000 ontology development
tool to support the statement of the authors that
ontology axioms and events can be transformed into
BRs. Protégé-2000 was chosen to develop the
ontology because it allows the open source software
to be installed locally. A free version of the software
provides all features and capabilities required for the
present research as well as being user-friendly. It
also maintains multiple inheritances, provides
exhaustive decomposition, disjoint decomposition
and constraints writing as well as being Java-based
(Jakkilinki, 2005).
The axioms are implemented in Protégé-2000
ontology by the Protégé Axiom Language (PAL)
constraints. PAL is a superset of the first-order logic,
which is used for writing strong logical constraints
(Crubézy, 2002).
The schema of PAL constraints (and ontology as
a whole) was analysed to enable their transformation
into BRs.
The core of the PAL constraint is the PAL-
statement, which can be mapped to the BR and
consequently to the ECA rule. The PAL-statement
has clearly defined action and, sometimes,
condition. The event is not defined because the user
triggers constraints represented by PAL manually,
when required. All constraints written by PAL
define the state in which the domain should be.
However, no information is provided about what
should be done to implement a desirable state.
An example of the PAL constraint is as follows:
(defrange ?contract_product :FRAME
Contract_Product)
(forall ?contract_product
(and (=> (and (> (quantity
?contract_product) 10.0)
(< (quantity ?contract_product) 19.0))
(= (discount ?contract_product) 0.03))
(=> (and (> (quantity
?contract_product) 20.0)
(< (quantity ?contract_product) 49.0))
(= (discount ?contract_product) 0.05))…))
Some events of interest were defined in terms of
ontology.
There is no distinct relationship between
ontology axioms and the defined events. Therefore,
it is necessary to extend ontology by adding a class,
describing the relationship between particular events
and axioms, to enable an automatic transformation
of ontology axioms and events into BRs.
4 CONCLUSION
The analysis of the related works on information
systems development using the domain ontology
shows that the business rules and events are part of
knowledge represented by the ontology. Ontology
axioms and events, describing terms of the same
ontology, can be transformed into the business rules,
while the business rules can be transformed into
information processing rules and, finally, the
information processing rules can be transformed into
executable rules. Ontology events can be
transformed into business events, which can be
mapped into events in the information system, while
the events in the information system can be mapped
or transformed into software events.
The analysis of the related works on events
modelling in the process of business rule-based
information systems development shows that it is
necessary to differentiate between business events,
events in information systems and software events to
ensure consistent and complete modelling and
implementation of these events in information
systems.
Software
event 0
Action 0
activates
Digital
object (-s)
input / output
Software
event 1
causes
Digital
object (-s)
triggers
Condition
evaluation
Action 1 Action 2
input / output
Digital
object (-s)
input / output
Software
event 2
Software
event 3
causes causes
ECA rule
...
...
Figure 4: Event-driven process chain in the SS.
ICEIS 2006 - INFORMATION SYSTEMS ANALYSIS AND SPECIFICATION
222

The example provided shows that the suggested
method could be used to elicit business rules
ontology. For this transformation, a suitable tool was
needed and Protégé-2000 was chosen.
The analysis has shown that this tool can be used
for the purposes pursued in this study. However, it is
not provided with a suitable plug-in for PAL
constraints and events transformation into ECA
rules.
REFERENCES
Adaikkalavan, R., S. Chakravarthy (2003). SnoopIB:
Interval-Based Event Specification and Detection for
Active Databases. LNCS 2798, Springer-Verlag, 2003,
p.190-204.
Avison, D., G. Fitzgerald (2003). Information Systems
Development. Methodologies, Techniques and Tools.
Third Edition. Mc Graw Hill. 2003. p. 592.
Bugaite, D., O. Vasilecas (2005). Ontology-Based
Elicitation of Business Rules (to appear). In
A.G.Nilsson, R.Gustas, W.Wojtkowski,
W.G.Wojtkowski, S.Wrycza, J.Zupancic (Eds.), Proc.
of ISD'2005, Sweden, Springer-Verlag, 2006, p. 795-
806.
Caplinskas, A., A. Lupeikiene, O. Vasilecas (2002).
Shared Conceptualisation of Business Systems,
Information Systems and Supporting Software.
Databases and Information Systems II, Kluwer
Academic Publishers, 2002, p. 109-120.
Cilia, M. (2002). An Active Functionality Service for Open
Distributed Heterogeneous Environments. PhD
Thesis, Technische Universit¨at Darmstadt
genehmigte, 2002. (October, 2005).
http://www.dvs1.informatik.tu-
darmstadt.de/publications/pdf/active-functionality.
Cilia, M., C. Bornhovd, A. P. Buchmann (2005). Event
Handling for the Universal Enterprise (to appear).
Information Technology and Management (ITM),
Special Issue on Universal Global Integration, 2005.
(September, 2005). http://www.dvs1.informatik.tu-
darmstadt.de/staff/bornhoevd/ITM-journal.pdf.
Crubézy, M. (2002). The Protégé Axiom Language and
Toolset (PAL). 2002. (February, 2005).
http://protege.stanford.edu/plugins/paltabs/pal-
documentation/index.html.
Humphreys, K., R. Gaizauskas, S. Azzam (1997). Event
Coreference for Information Extraction. The Workshop
on Operational Factors in Practical, Robust Anaphora
Resolution for Unrestricted Texts, 35th Annual
Meeting of the Association for Computational
Linguistics, Madrid, 1997, p. 75–81.
Yu, J., J. Hunter, E. Reiter, S. Sripada (2001). An
Approach to Generating Summaries of Time Series
Data in the Gas Turbine Domain. In Proc. of ICII2001
(Beijing), IEEE Press, p. 44-51.
Jakkilinki, R., N. Sharda, M. Georgievski (2005).
Developing an Ontology for Teaching Multimedia
Design and Planning. (September, 2005).
http://sci.vu.edu.au/~nalin/MUDPYOntologyPreprint
V2.pdf.
Johnston, S. (2004). Rational UML Profile for business
modelling. IBM. 2004. (August, 2005). http://www-
128.ibm.com/developerworks/rational/library/5167.ht
ml#author1.
Lebedys, E., O. Vasilecas (2004). Analysis of business
rules modelling languages. In Proc. of the IT’2004,
Lithuania, Technologija, 2004, p. 487-494.
Lockhart, J. (2005). The Big Event: Oracle Workflow
Business Event System. IMPAC. (February, 2005).
http://bcoaug.oaug.org/downloads/Workflow%20BES.
ppt.
Mahesh, K. (1996). Ontology Development for Machine
Translation: Ideology and Methodology. Technical
Report MCCS 96-292. Computing Research
Laboratory, New Mexico State University. 1996.
(September, 2005).
http://www.fdi.ucm.es/profesor/vaquero/DOCT/Mikro
KosmosOnto(MCCS-96-292).pdf.
Michiels, C., M. Snoeck, W.Lemahieu, F. Goethals, G.
Dedene (2003). A Layered Architecture Sustaining
Model Driven and Event Driven Software
Development. LNCS 2890, p. 58-65.
Nüttgens, M., T. Feld, V. Zimmermann (1997). Business
Process Modeling with EPC and UML Transformation
or Integration? In M.Schader, A. Korthaus (Eds.),
Proc. of the UML'97 Workshop “Unified Modeling
Language - Technical Aspects and Applications”,
Germany, Physica-Verlag, 1997, p. 250-261.
OMG (2005). EDOC Vision (Extracted from the EDOC
specification). Object Management Group (OMG).
2005. (September, 2005). http://www.enterprise-
component.com/docs/EDOC%20Vision.pdf.
Siorpaes, K., K. Prantner, D. Bachlechner (2004). Project:
e-tourism-v8. Class Event. 2004. (September, 2005).
http://e-tourism.deri.at/ont/Event.html.
Valatkaite, I., O. Vasilecas (2004). On Business Rules
Approach to the Information Systems Development. In
H. Linger at al (Eds.), Proc. of ISD’2003. Australia,
Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, 2004, p.199-
208.
Weigand, H., A. de Moor (2005). Linking event-driven
and communication-oriented business modeling. The
Language Action Perspective on Communication
Modelling,Sweden, 2005, p. 107-118.
BUSINESS RULES ELICITATION IN THE PROCESS OF ENTERPRISE INFORMATION SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT
223