Dictionary based interchanges for iSURF An Interoperability Service Utility for Collaborative Supply

1
Dictionary based interchanges for iSURF -An
Interoperability Service Utility for
Collaborative Supply Chain Planning across
Multiple Domains
OASIS SET TC Use Case - iSURF

• David Webber
• OASIS SET TC / CAM TC
• (with excerpts and summary from main presentation
  by
• Prof. Dr. Asuman Dogac
• METU-SRDC
• Turkey)

2
METU OASIS SET TC Use Case

• Part I iSURF - Document Interoperability
  Requirements
• Part II Using Dictionary based approach and SET
  Tools for aligning structure components across
  syntax vocabularies

3
Part I iSURF Document Interoperability
Requirements
4
Research Objectives Public Domain Tools
Supporting SMEs for Collaborative Supply Chain
Planning

• iSURF Semantic Interoperability Service Utility
• iSURF Global Data Synchronization and Transitory
  Collaboration Service Utility for dynamic
  transient supply chain relationships for the SMEs

5
Existing iSURF Domain Syntax Format Alignment
6
Dictionary approach summary

• If the document components of two different CCTS
  based standard share the same semantic
  properties
• Use this as an indication that they may be
  similar
• Some explicitly defined semantic properties may
  imply further implicit semantic relationships
• Use a reasoner to obtain implicit relationships
• Align to dictionary definitions allowing
  crosswalk
• Create harmonized dictionary lookup
• Use abstract UID as common reference (linkage
  between language specific named types/objects)
• Explicate semantics related with the different
  usages of document data types in different
  document schemas to obtain some desired
  interpretations by means of such informal
  semantics
• Determine similar/match relationships and rules
  for constraint alignment and compound component
  relationships (e.g. date-time vice date and time)
• Provide dictionary structure format for managing
  relationships
• Leverage existing OASIS CAM and ebXML Registry TC
  work

7
The current SET Harmonized Ontology

• The current version of the harmonized ontology
  contains the ontological representations of
• All of the CCs and BIEs in CCL 07B
• All of the BIEs in the common library of UBL 2.0
• All of the OAGIS 9.1 Common Components and Fields
• All of the elements in the common library of GS1
  XML
• For supply chain applications these can be
  exactly related to existing well established
  UN/CEFACT dictionary objects (also foundation for
  CCTS)
• Each UN/CEFACT dictionary object has explicit
  unique element designator UID (any new items
  well be assigned their own domain UID).

8
Part II Using dictionary based approach as SET
Tools for aligning iSURF documents in different
syntax
9
Semantic Properties of UN/CEFACT CCTS based
Standards

• The Core Components have the following semantic
  properties
• Core Component Data Types
• Context
• Code Lists
• Object Class Term
• Representation Term
• The semantics that a BIE is based on a Core
  Component
• UID labelling mechanism

10
The Upper Ontology for the Semantics Exposed by
the CCTS Framework
11
A Specific Instance of the Problem

• How to transform
• UBL 2.0 Forecast Instance, to
• GS1 XML Forecast Instance?

12
(No Transcript)
13
The first step

• Convert the XSDs of these document instances to
  CAM templates (forms abstraction layer for
  inspection by XSLT tools)
• Extract dictionary definitions from templates
  into domain dictionaries assign UID designators.
• Merge dictionaries into one master dictionary
• Combination of name, type and OWL ontology
  matching
• Compare to UN/CEFACT dictionary align UID
  designators
• Assign similar / match rules for
  constraints/components
• CAM xslt tool can be used to generate the
  dictionaries
• Store results in harmonized dictionary format
• http//camprocessor.sourceforge.net

14
CAM dictionary generation overview
XSD schemas
CAM Templates
XSLT script
Compare Merge
Components Name Description Type Restrictions UID
Master Dictionary
15
Dictionary Tools

• Generate a dictionary of core components from a
  set of exchange templates
• Separate dictionary content by namespace
• Merges annotations and type definitions from
  exchange template into dictionary
• Compare each exchange template to the master
  domain dictionary
• Produce spreadsheet workbooks
• Update spreadsheet and export back to dictionary
  core components

16
Create Dictionary CAM process
Select Dictionary empty for new create, or
existing for merge
Output dictionary filename
Select template content namespace to match with
Merge mode use true to combine content
17
Compare to Dictionary
Pick dictionary to compare with
Name of result cross-reference file
18
Open Cross-Reference as Spreadsheet
19
Explicate semantics related with the different
usages of document data types

• Different document standards use CCTS Data Types
  differently
• For example, Code.Type" in one standard is
  represented by Text.Type" in another standard
  and yet with Identier.Type" in another standard
• This knowledge in real world is expressed through
  class equivalences so that not only the humans
  but also the reasoner knows about it
• Code.Type Text.Type
• Name.Type Text.Type
• Identier.Type Text.Type
• Can cross-reference via UID as well as type

20
Second Step

• Human / OWL inspectors
• Dictionary alignment report produces known
  equivalents listing (confidence 100), and then
  lesser equivalence rankings based on matching
  factors
• Component compound relationships resolved using
  CAM template structure layouts
• Human inspection then reviews and resolves and
  updates dictionary (using Excel spreadsheet
  workbook format)
• New dictionary produced
• Iterative refinement over time can enhance
  alignment along with common practices through
  industry agreements

21
Addressing Structural Differences in Document
Schemas

• The harmonized ontology is effective only to
  discover equivalence of both semantically and
  structurally similar document artifacts
• However Different document standards use core
  components in different structures
• A problem in finding the similar artifacts in two
  different document schemas is that the
  semantically similar artifacts may appear at
  structurally different positions
• This is solved using CAM templates and dictionary
  crosswalks on UID values along with match/similar
  designators and associated crosswalk rules

22
Example UID alignment
CAM templates UID lookup in dictionary resolve
structurally different schemas
23
Methodology
CAM Template Generator
Structure Maps XPaths
Dictionary XML
Spreadsheet
24
CAM template / Dictionary / OWL
R U L E S
Source OWL Instance
Target/Source XSD Document Schemas
CAM Template
Dictionary
Subsumption Relations
Knowledge Base
Rule Engine Reasoner
Source XML Instance
Target XML Instance
XSLT Script
DATA LEVEL
KNOWLEDGE LEVEL
DATA LEVEL
25
Back to our problem Translating iSURF Planning
Documents Conforming to Different CCTS based
Standards
26
A Specific Instance of the Problem

• How to transform
• UBL 2.0 Forecast Instance, to
• GS1 XML Forecast Instance?

27
The above equivalences are discovered through the
UID dictionary cross-references and can be
stored back into CAM templates ltExtensionsgt
section for runtime crosswalk use.
28
Runtime crosswalks between template structure
member items
29
Summary

• Develop crosswalks
• Convert XSD schema to CAM templates
• Leverage template structure and XPath rules to
  build dictionaries with UID labels
• Build OWL relationships from schema
• Compare each dictionary to master dictionary and
  reference OWL and type knowledge bases to align
• Produce spreadsheet for manual review
• Save final results back to master dictionary
• Build runtime templates
• Compare individual CAM templates to master
  dictionary, generate cross-walk section between
  components
• Cross-walk can contain alignment rules in XPath
  for content handling (e.g. code values and
  re-formatting)