Towards the Automation of Modeling Language Independent Schema Integration

Abstract

View and schema integration are two very complex tasks in which several views and/or schemata are merged into one global conceptual schema. Due to its complexity, computer-based applications and tools that support and automate parts of the schema integration process are needed. In this paper we propose a composite schemabased matching approach in which we make use of not only taxonomies but also ontologies for facilitating the integration process. Our approach will be a first step towards developing a computer-based application for modeling language independent schema integration.

A Rule-Based Approach for the Recognition of Similarities and Differences in the Integration of Structural Karlstad Enterprise Modeling Schemata

“…Before describing the rules, it should be noted that it is possible to complement the presented rule-based approach with not only a name comparison based on ontology but also a name comparison based on taxonomy [10].…”

“…However, it should be noted that whenever ambiguity exists it is recommended to continue with a neighborhood comparison [10].…”

“…In rules S1-S4, name comparison always yields similar, meaning the compared concept names (labels) are not exactly the same but very similar. Rules S1-S4 can be viewed as a refinement and extension of the two rules expressed and proposed in [10] stated as:…”

“…However, the rules expressed and proposed in [10] are proposed for any modeling language, meaning the rules are modeling language independent, while the rules described in this paper are adapted for the Karlstad Enterprise Modeling approach. The rules for similar concept names are:…”

“…Occasionally it could be useful to continue with comparison of concept neighborhoods even if the comparison of concept names yields different (see also [10]). In doing so, synonyms that otherwise could pass unnoticed might be recognized (see Fig.…”