Towards Ontological Commitments with Ω-RIDL Markup Language

  • Damien Trog
  • Yan Tang
  • Robert Meersman
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4824)


In the DOGMA (Developing Ontology-Grounded Methods and Applications) ontology engineering approach, ontology construction starts from an uninterpreted base of elementary fact types, called lexons, which are mined from linguistic descriptions. Applications that ontologically commit to such a lexon base are assigned a formal semantics by mapping the application symbols to paths in this lexon base. Besides specifying which concepts are used, we restrict how they may be used and queried with semantic constraints, or rules, based on the fact-based database modeling method NIAM/ORM. Such ontological commitments are specified in the Ω-RIDL language. In this paper we present the Ω-RIDL Markup Language and illustrate with a case from the field of Human Resources Management.


Uniqueness Constraint Domain Ontology Ontological Commitment Competence Level Semantic Constraint 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Berners-Lee, T., Hendler, J., Lassila, O.: The semantic web. Scientific American 284(5), 34–43 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bloesch, A.C., Halpin, T.A.: Conceptual queries using ConQuer–II. In: ER 1997. Proc. of the 16th Int. Conf. on Conceptual Modeling, pp. 113–126. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    De Leenheer, P., de Moor, A., Meersman, R.: Context dependency management in ontology engineering: a formal approach. In: Spaccapietra, S., Atzeni, P., Fages, F., Hacid, M.-S., Kifer, M., Mylopoulos, J., Pernici, B., Shvaiko, P., Trujillo, J., Zaihrayeu, I. (eds.) Journal on Data Semantics VIII. LNCS, vol. 4380, pp. 26–56. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    de Moor, A., Leenheer, P.D., Meersman, R.: DOGMA-MESS. In: Schärfe, H., Hitzler, P., Øhrstrøm, P. (eds.) ICCS 2006. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4068, pp. 189–203. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    De Troyer, O.: On Data Schema Transformations. PhD thesis, Tilburg University, Netherlands (1993)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    De Troyer, O., Meersman, R., Verlinden, P.: RIDL* on the CRIS Case: a Workbench for NIAM. In: Olle, T., Verrijn-Stuart, A., Bhabuta, L. (eds.) Information Systems Design Methodologies: Computerized Assistance during the Information Systems Life Cycle, pp. 375–459. Elsevier Science Publishers, Amsterdam (1988)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Falkenberg, E.D.: Concepts for modelling information. In: IFIP Working Conf. on Modelling in Data Base Management Systems, pp. 95–109 (1976)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fellbaum, C.: WordNet: An Electronic Lexical Database. MIT Press, Cambridge (1998)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gruber, T.R.: Towards principles for the design of ontologies used for knowledge sharing. In: Guarino, N., Poli, R. (eds.) Formal Ontology in Conceptual Analysis and Knowledge Representation, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (1993)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Guarino, N.: Formal ontology, conceptual analysis and knowledge representation. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud. 43(5-6), 625–640 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Guarino, N.: Understanding, building and using ontologies. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud. 46(2-3), 293–310 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Guarino, N.: Formal ontology and information systems. In: FOIS 1998. Int. Conf. On Formal Ontology In Information Systems, Trento, Italy, pp. 3–15. IOS Press, Amsterdam (1998)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Guarino, N., Welty, C.: Evaluating ontological decisions with ontoclean. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud. 43, 625–640 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Halpin, T.A.: Information Modeling and Relational Databases: From Conceptual Analysis to Logical Design. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (2001)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jarrar, M., Meersman, R.: Formal ontology engineering in the DOGMA approach. In: Meersman, R., Tari, Z., et al. (eds.) CoopIS 2002, DOA 2002, and ODBASE 2002. LNCS, vol. 2519, pp. 1238–1254. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jarrar, M., Demey, J., Meersman, R.: On using conceptual data modeling for ontology engineering. In: Spaccapietra, S., March, S., Aberer, K. (eds.) Journal on Data Semantics I. LNCS, vol. 2800, pp. 185–207. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Meersman, R.: Towards the very high level end user. In: Infotech State of the Art Report, Pergamon Press (1980)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Meersman, R.: The RIDL conceptual language. Research report, Int. Centre for Information Analysis Services, Control Data, Brussels (1982)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Meersman, R.: Semantic ontology tools in is design. In: Raś, Z.W., Skowron, A. (eds.) ISMIS 1999. LNCS, vol. 1609, pp. 30–45. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Meersman, R.: Ontologies and databases: More than a fleeting resemblance. In: d’Atri, A., Missikoff, M. (eds.) OES/SEO 2001 Rome Workshop, Luiss Publications, Missikoff (2001)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Meersman, R.: Web and ontologies: Playtime or business at the last frontier in computing? In: Proc. of the NSF-EU Workshop on Database and Information Systems Research for Semantic Web and Enterprises, pp. 61–67 (2002)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mena, E., Kashyap, V., Sheth, A.P., Illarramendi, A.: OBSERVER: An approach for query processing in global information systems based on interoperation across pre-existing ontologies. In: Conf. on Cooperative Information Systems, pp. 14–25 (1996)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Spyns, P.: Object role modelling for ontology engineering in the DOGMA framework. In: Meersman, R., Tari, Z., Herrero, P. (eds.) OTM 2005 Workshops. LNCS, vol. 3762, pp. 710–719. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Spyns, P., Meersman, R., Jarrar, M.: Data modelling versus ontology engineering. Database Management and Information Systems 31(4), 12–17 (2002)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Tang, Y., Meersman, R.: Towards building semantic decision table with domain ontologies. In: Int. Conf. on Inf. Tech. and Management, pp. 14–22 (2007)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    ter Hofstede, A.H.M., Proper, H.A., van der Weide, T.: A Conceptual Language for the Description and Manipulation of Complex Information Models. In: Gupta, G. (ed.) Seventeenth Annual Computer Science Conference: Gupta, G, vol. 16, pp. 157–167. University of Canterbury (1994)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Trog, D., Vereecken, J., Christiaens, S., De Leenheer, P., Meersman, R.: T-lex: A role-based ontology engineering tool. In: Meersman, R., Tari, Z., Herrero, P. (eds.) OTM 2006 Workshops. LNCS, vol. 4278, pp. 1191–1200. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    van Griethuysen, J.J.: Concepts and terminology for the conceptual schema and the information base. Technical Report ISO/TC97/TR9007, International Standards Organization (1987)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Verheijen, G., van Bekkum, P.: NIAM, aN Information Analysis Method. In: Olle, T., Sol, H., Verrijn-Stuart, A. (eds.) IFIP Conf. on Comparative Review of Information Systems Methodologies, pp. 537–590. North-Holland, Amsterdam (1982)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Verheyden, P., De Bo, J., Meersman, R.: Semantically unlocking database content through ontology-based mediation. In: SWDB, pp. 109–126 (2004)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Zhao, G., Gao, Y., Meersman, R.: An ontology-based approach to business modelling. In: ICKEDS 2004. Proc. of the Int. Conf. of Knowledge Engineering and Decision Support, pp. 213–221 (2004)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Zhao, G., Meersman, R.: Architecting ontology for scalability and versatility. In: Meersman, R., Tari, Z. (eds.) On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems 2005: CoopIS, DOA, and ODBASE. LNCS, vol. 3761, pp. 1164–1605. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Damien Trog
    • 1
  • Yan Tang
    • 1
  • Robert Meersman
    • 1
  1. 1.Semantics Technology and Applications Laboratory (STARLab), Department of Computer Science, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Pleinlaan 2, B-1050 BRUSSELS 5Belgium

Personalised recommendations