In this paper, we are motivated by the problem of semantic web services composition. We first present a typical example requiring services composition, give a definition of an automated services composition approach and outline its main requirements. We then discuss existing techniques and their limitations with regards to those requirements. Finally, we present our proposal for web services composition based on autonomous services interactions.

Summary Business models are economic models that describe the rationale of why organizations create and deliver value. These models focus on what organizations offer and why. Business process models capture business activities and the ways in which they are accomplished (i.e. their coordination). They explain who is involved in the activities, and how and when these activities should be performed. This paper discusses the alignment between business models and business process models. It proposes a novel systematic method for extracting a value chain (i.e. business model) expressed in the Resources, Events, Agents (REA) ontology from a business process model expressed in Business Process Model and Notation™. Our contribution is twofold: (1) from a theoretical standpoint we identified a set of structural and behavioural patterns that enable us to infer the corresponding REA value chain; (2) from a pragmatic perspective, our approach can be used to derive useful knowledge about the business process and serve as a starting point for business analysis.

No abstract

Summary We present a case study in model‐driven development of an e‐tourism portal that we chose to develop through generation from a domain model encoded as an ontology. We present (1) the requirements of e‐tourism portal, which dictated its high‐level design; (2) the principles behind our implementation strategy, including the use of a domain ontology as a starting model within the context of a model‐driven transformational approach; (3) the ontology development process and the code generation strategy used; and (4) the lessons learned. In particular, we compare our experiences to those reported in the model‐driven engineering (MDE) literature along 3 dimensions, ie, (1) the impact of MDE on the development process, (2) the choice of the modeling approach, and (3) the impact of code generation on design and code quality and testing. Overall, our experiences corroborated some of the theoretical claims and many of the practical experiences with MDE. Key findings include (1) model‐driven development makes maintenance, not development, more efficient; (2) it does require a higher skill level than traditional development; (3) clients and managers need to be educated into what incrementality means in a generative approach; (4) UML is neither necessary nor sufficient to handle the required representational flexibility; (5) it is difficult to build models that are good for both human consumption and code generation; and (6) it is difficult to generate code that is, simultaneously, efficient, pretty, and easy to maintain. We conclude by summarizing the findings of the paper.