Integrating Semantic Business Policy into Web Service Composition

  • Xu Meng
  • Chen Junliang
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4652)


Web services composition is becoming increasingly important as the 3rd part service providers are now getting ready to provide more complex service-based applications. Accordingly it is critical to integrate the business policy with web service composition dynamically to adapt to changing business environments. Business policy needs to be represented explicitly, to be understood by semantics, and to be applied automatically. To support the business control in the interactive web service composition, this paper proposed a SWRL-based business policy model which does the rule reasoning based on semantics. And a business policy driven services recommend method was present to apply this model to the web service composition, which bridges the gap between business requirements and academic research. As a result, 3rd part service providers can focus on the business goals to be achieved, instead of having to create detailed control and data follows for the work at hand.


Business Process Rule Inference Service Logic User Context Business Rule 
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.
    Sirin, E., Parsia, B., Hendler, J.: Filtering and Selecting Semantic Web Services with Interactive Composition Techniques. Intelligent Systems 19(4), 42–49 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Arpinar, I.B., Zhang, R., Boanerges, A., et al.: Ontology-driven Web service Composition Platform. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on E-Commerce Technology, pp. 146–152 (2004)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Xu, M., Meng, X.W., Chen, J.L., Mei, X.: The Research of Load Balancing for Integrated Service Platform. Journal of Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications, 94–97 (20065A) (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Xu, M., Chen, J., Peng, Y., Mei, X.: A Semantic Association-Based service creation method. In: the Proceedings of Web Intelligence Conference, IEEE/WIE/ACM, HongKong, pp. 666–669 (2006)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    von Halle, B.: Business Rules Applied: Building Better Systems using the Business Rules Approach. Wiley, Chichester (2001)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Antoniou, G., Arief, M.: Executable Declarative Business Rules and Their Use in Electronic Commerce. In: Nyberg, K., Heys, H.M. (eds.) SAC 2002. LNCS, vol. 2595, pp. 6–10. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Grosof, B.N.: Representing E-Commerce Rules via Situated Courteous Logic Programs in RuleML. In: WITS 2001. Proceedings of the 11th Workshop on Information Technologies and Systems (2001)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Trastour, D., Preist, C., Coleman, D.: Using Semantic Web Technology to Enhance Current Business-to-Business Integration Approaches. In: Proceedings of the Seventh IEEE International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference, pp. 222–230. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Spreeuwenbergn, S., Gerrits, R.: Business Rules in the Semantic Web, are there any or are they different? In: Proceedings of 2nd European Semantic Web Conference (2005)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Horrocks, I., Patel, P.F.: A Proposal for an OWL Rules Language. In: Proceedings of WWW 2004, New York, pp. 723–731 (2004)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Anis, C., Mira, M.: Hybrid Web Service Composition: Business Processes Meet Business Rules. In: ICSOC 2004. 2ed International Conference on Service Oriented Computing, pp. 30–38. ACM Press, New York (2004)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Zeng, L., Flaxer, D., Chang, H., Jeng, J.-J.: PLMflow–Dynamic Business Process Composition and Execution by Rule Inference. In: Buchmann, A.P., Casati, F., Fiege, L., Hsu, M.-C., Shan, M.-C. (eds.) TES 2002. LNCS, vol. 2444, pp. 144–150. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Antoniou, G., Damasio, C.V., Grosof, B., et al.: Technical report: Combining Rules and Ontologies-A survey,
  14. 14.
    Antoniou, G., van Harmelen, F.: Web Ontology Language: OWL. In: Staab, S., Studer, R. (eds.) Handbook on Ontologies in Information Systems, pp. 67–92. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Maamar, Z., Mostefaoui, S.K., Mahmoud, Q.H.: Context for Personalized Web Services. In: Proceedings of the 38th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, pp. 89–98 (2005)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Martin, O., Holger, K., Samson, T., et al.: Supporting Rule System Interoperability on the Semantic Web with SWRL. In: Gil, Y., Motta, E., Benjamins, V.R., Musen, M.A. (eds.) ISWC 2005. LNCS, vol. 3729, pp. 974–986. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)Google Scholar
  17. 17.

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Xu Meng
    • 1
  • Chen Junliang
    • 1
  1. 1.State Key Laboratory of Networking and Switching Technology, Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications, BeijingChina

Personalised recommendations