Towards a Data Model for Quality Management Web Services: An Ontology of Measurement for Enterprise Modeling

  • Henry M. Kim
  • Mark S. Fox
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2348)


Though the WWW is used for business process automation to lower costs and shorten leadtimes, arguably its use has been limited for another metric of business success: Improving quality. A promising advancement to the WWW is the development of the Semantic Web, which relies upon using machine process-able domain knowledge represented in ontologies. Therefore, one promising area of research and application is the development of ontologies used as data models to provide quality management services on the Semantic Web. In this paper, the TOVE Measurement Ontology is presented as a formal model of a fundamental domain, which needs to be represented to provide these services. Measurement is fundamental for representing quality because before quality is evaluated and managed, it must first be measured. An assessment system for measuring attributes of an entity, activities for measurement, and quality as conformance to requirements are the core concepts represented in the ontology. The formal representation of measurement is emphasized over detailing context of ontology use, since this is an issue not heavily examined by the ontology community and one that needs to be detailed in order develop data models to provide Semantic Web based quality management services.


Quality Management Measured Attribute Quality Requirement Enterprise Model Situation Calculus 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Fox, Mark S. and Grüninger, Michael. “Enterprise Modeling”, AI Magazine, AAAI Press, Fall (1998), 109–21.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Campbell, A. E. and Shapiro, S. C. “Ontological Mediation: An Overview”, IJCAI Workshop on Basic Ontological Issues in Knowledge Sharing, AAAI Press: Menlo Park, (1995).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gruber, Thomas R. “Towards Principles for the Design of Ontologies Used for Knowledge Sharing”, In International Workshop on Formal Ontology, Guarino, N. & Poli, R. (Eds.), Padova, Italy (1993).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Labrou, Y. and Finin, T. “Yahoo! as an Ontology-Using Yahoo! Categories to Describe Documents”, In: 8th CIKM, Kansas City, MO, November (1999), 180–7.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Das, Aseem, Wu, Wei, and McGuinness, Deborah L. “Industrial Strength Ontology Management”, In Proceedings of the International Semantic Web Working Symposium. Stanford, CA, July (2001).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Berners-Lee, Tim, Hendler, James, and Lassila, Ora, “The Semantic Web”, Scientific American, May (2001).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    IBM Software Solutions, “Web services by IBM: Overview”, (2001, November-last update). Available-, (Accessed:November 9, 2001).
  8. 8.
    Kim, Henry M., “Representing and Reasoning about Quality using Enterprise Models”, Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario Canada M5S 3G9 (1999).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Crosby, P. B., Quality is Free: The Art of Making Quality Certain, McGraw-Hill: New York, NY (2001).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    American Management Association, Blueprints for Service Quality: The Federal Express Approach, AMA Publications: NY, (1992).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Grüninger, M., and Fox, M.S. “Methodology for the Design and Evaluation of Ontologies”, Workshop on Basic Ontological Issues in Knowledge Sharing, IJCAI-95, Montreal (1995).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Scheaffer, Richard L. and McClave, James T. Statistics for Engineers, PWS Publishers: Boston, MA: (1982).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    McCarthy, J., and Hayes, P. J., “Some Philosophical Problems from the Standpoint of AI”, in Machine Intelligence 4, Meltzer B. and Michie D. (eds.), Edinburgh, UK: Edinburgh University Press (1969), 463–501.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kim, Henry M., “Enterprise Models of Measurement: A Comparison of Existing Models Used for Quality Management and E-Business”, Work Report, Schulich School of Business, York University, Toronto, Ontario, Also: (2000, August 2000-last update), Available-, (Accessed: November 21, 2001).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jennings, N., Sycara, K., and Woolridge, M., “A roadmap of agent research and development”, Journal of Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, Vol. 1 (1998), 275–306.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Uschold, Mike, “Where Are the Killer Apps?”, In: Proceedings of ECAI-98 Workshop on Applications of Ontologies and Problem-Solving Methods (1998).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kim, Henry M., “Predicting how the Semantic Web Will Evolve”, Communications of the ACM, February, Vol. 45, No. 2, 48–54 (2002).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Henry M. Kim
    • 1
  • Mark S. Fox
    • 2
  1. 1.Schulich School of BusinessYork UniversityTorontoCanada
  2. 2.Department of Mechanical and Industrial EngineeringUniversity of TorontoTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations