The present invention relates to meta-models, and more specifically to temporal scope translation of customer relationship management using semantic web technologies.
Most customers have complex legacy application environments. Legacy application environments are all of the applications and programs that the customer depends on for their day to day operations. The ability to model the complex legacy environments is helpful for service oriented architecture (SOA) engagement.
Many meta-models that can model the complex legacy application environments define a holistic, end-to end and abstract-to detail picture of an existing business or information technology solution, including data for the past and present states where relevant transformation of informational at levels of abstraction took place. Therefore, the meta-model has time modeled as part of the meta-model.
According to one embodiment of the present invention, a method for implementing topic map meta-models of a service oriented architecture (SOA) industry model repository (IMR) is provided comprising a meta-model service associated with a physical asset repository. The meta-model service includes at least one topic map meta-model included within an information model repository common meta-meta-model, and the information model repository common meta-meta-model included within a meta-meta-meta-model with a topic map based index. The method comprises a computer assigning topics, occurrences, and attributes from the meta-model service to the at least one topic map meta-model; the computer assigning the topics, occurrences and attributes from the at least one topic map meta-model to a plurality of temporal scope topic map meta-models, wherein a first temporal scope topic map meta-model represents a state of the at least one topic map meta-model at a first time, and wherein a second temporal scope topic map meta-model of the plurality of temporal scope topic map meta-models represents a state of the at least one topic map meta-model at a second time; the computer converting the topics, occurrences, and attributes from the plurality of temporal scope topic map meta-models into resource description framework triples; and the computer persisting the resource description framework triples into a resource description framework repository.
According to another embodiment of the present invention, a computer program product for implementing a meta-model service of a service oriented architecture industry model repository into a web ontology language representation of at least one topic map meta-model specific to temporal scope. The computer product comprises one or more computer-readable tangible storage devices; program instructions, stored on at least one of the one or more storage devices, to assign topics, occurrences, and attributes from the meta-model service to the at least one topic map meta-model; program instructions, stored on at least one of the one or more storage devices, to assign topics, occurrences, and attributes from the at least one topic map meta-model to a plurality of temporal scope topic map meta-models, wherein a first temporal scope topic map meta-model of the plurality of temporal scope topic map meta-models represents a state of the at least one topic map meta-model at a first time and wherein a second temporal scope topic map meta-model of the plurality of temporal scope topic map meta-models represents a state of the at least one topic map meta-model at a second time; program instructions, stored on at least one of the one or more storage devices, to convert the topics, occurrences, and attributes from the plurality of temporal scope topic map meta-models into resource description framework triples; and program instructions, stored on at least one of the one or more storage devices, to persist the resource description framework triples into a resource description framework repository.
According to another embodiment of the present invention, a computer system for implementing a meta-model service of a service oriented architecture industry model repository into a web ontology language representation of at least one topic map meta-model specific to temporal scope. The computer system comprises: one or more processors, one or more computer-readable memories and one or more computer-readable, tangible storage devices; program instructions, stored on at least one of the one or more storage devices for execution by at least one of the one or more processors via at least one of the one or more memories, to assign topics, occurrences, and attributes from the meta-model service to the at least one topic map meta-model; program instructions, stored on at least one of the one or more storage devices for execution by at least one of the one or more processors via at least one of the one or more memories, to assign topics, occurrences, and attributes from the at least one topic map meta-model to a plurality of temporal scope topic map meta-models, wherein a first temporal scope topic map meta-model of the plurality of temporal scope topic map meta-models represents a state of the at least one topic map meta-model at a first time and wherein a second temporal scope topic map meta-model of the plurality of temporal scope topic map meta-models represents a state of the at least one topic map meta-model at a second time; program instructions, stored on at least one of the one or more storage devices for execution by at least one of the one or more processors via at least one of the one or more memories, to convert the topics, occurrences, and attributes from the plurality of temporal scope topic map meta-models into resource description framework triples; and program instructions, stored on at least one of the one or more storage devices for execution by at least one of the one or more processors via at least one of the one or more memories, to persist the resource description framework triples into a resource description framework repository.
a-7b shows a flowchart of an exemplary implementation of a method of taking in a topic and all of the locations of the topic on an RDF server and particular repository to be used for persisting a resulting RDF in which illustrative embodiments may be implemented.
As will be appreciated by one skilled in the art, aspects of the present invention may be embodied as a system, method or computer program product. Accordingly, aspects of the present invention may take the form of an entirely hardware embodiment, an entirely software embodiment (including firmware, resident software, micro-code, etc.) or an embodiment combining software and hardware aspects that may all generally be referred to herein as a “circuit,” “module” or “system.” Furthermore, aspects of the present invention may take the form of a computer program product embodied in one or more computer-readable medium(s) having computer-readable program code embodied thereon.
Any combination of one or more computer-readable medium(s) may be utilized. The computer-readable medium may be a computer-readable signal medium or a computer-readable storage medium. A computer-readable storage medium may be, for example, but not limited to, an electronic, magnetic, optical, electromagnetic, infrared, or semiconductor system, apparatus, or device, or any suitable combination of the foregoing. More specific examples (a non-exhaustive list) of the computer-readable storage medium would include the following: an electrical connection having one or more wires, a portable computer diskette, a hard disk, a random access memory (RAM), a read-only memory (ROM), an erasable programmable read-only memory (EPROM or Flash memory), an optical fiber, a portable compact disc read-only memory (CD-ROM), an optical storage device, a magnetic storage device, or any suitable combination of the foregoing. In the context of this document, a computer-readable storage medium may be any tangible medium that can contain, or store a program for use by or in connection with an instruction execution system, apparatus, or device.
A computer-readable signal medium may include a propagated data signal with computer-readable program code embodied therein, for example, in baseband or as part of a carrier wave. Such a propagated signal may take any of a variety of forms, including, but not limited to, electro-magnetic, optical, or any suitable combination thereof. A computer-readable signal medium may be any computer-readable medium that is not a computer-readable storage medium and that can communicate, propagate, or transport a program for use by or in connection with an instruction execution system, apparatus, or device.
Program code embodied on a computer-readable medium may be transmitted using any appropriate medium, including but not limited to wireless, wireline, optical fiber cable, RF, etc., or any suitable combination of the foregoing.
Computer program code for carrying out operations of the present invention may be written in an object oriented programming language such as Java, Smalltalk, C++ or the like. However, the computer program code for carrying out operations of the present invention may also be written in conventional procedural programming languages, such as the “C” programming language or similar programming languages. The program code may execute entirely on the user's computer, partly on the user's computer, as a stand-alone software package, partly on the user's computer and partly on a remote computer or entirely on the remote computer or server. In the latter scenario, the remote computer may be connected to the user's computer through a local area network (LAN) or a wide area network (WAN), or the connection may be made to an external computer (for example, through the Internet using an Internet Service Provider).
Aspects of the present invention are described below with reference to flowchart illustrations and/or block diagrams of methods, apparatus (systems) and computer program products according to embodiments of the invention. It will be understood that each block of the flowchart illustrations and/or block diagrams, and combinations of blocks in the flowchart illustrations and/or block diagrams, can be implemented by computer program instructions. These computer program instructions may be provided to a processor of a general purpose computer, special purpose computer, or other programmable data processing apparatus to produce a machine, such that the instructions, which execute via the processor of the computer or other programmable data processing apparatus, create means for implementing the functions/acts specified in the flowchart and/or block diagram block or blocks.
These computer program instructions may also be stored in a computer-readable memory that can direct a computer or other programmable data processing apparatus to function in a particular manner, such that the instructions stored in the computer-readable memory produce an article of manufacture including instruction means which implement the function/act specified in the flowchart and/or block diagram block or blocks.
The computer program instructions may also be loaded onto a computer or other programmable data processing apparatus to cause a series of operational steps to be performed on the computer or other programmable apparatus to produce a computer implemented process such that the instructions which execute on the computer or other programmable apparatus provide steps for implementing the functions/acts specified in the flowchart and/or block diagram block or blocks.
With reference now to the figures, and in particular, with reference to
In the depicted example, server 4 and server 6 connect to network 2 along with storage unit 8. In addition, clients 10, 12, and 14 connect to network 2. Clients 110, 12, and 14 may be, for example, personal computers or network computers. In the depicted example, server 4 provides information, such as boot files, operating system images, and applications to clients 10, 12, and 14. Clients 10, 12, and 14 are clients to server 4 in this example. Network data processing system 1 may include additional servers, clients, and other devices not shown.
Program code or meta-models located in network data processing system 1 may be stored on a computer-readable storage device and downloaded to a data processing system or other device for use. For example, program code may be stored on a computer-readable storage device on server 4 and downloaded to client 8 over network 2 for use on client 8.
In the depicted example, network data processing system 1 is the Internet with network 2 representing a worldwide collection of networks and gateways that use the Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol (TCP/IP) suite of protocols to communicate with one another. At the heart of the Internet is a backbone of high-speed data communication lines between major nodes or host computers, consisting of thousands of commercial, governmental, educational and other computer systems that route data and messages. Of course, network data processing system 1 also may be implemented as a number of different types of networks, such as, for example, an intranet, local area network (LAN), or a wide area network (WAN).
With reference now to
Processor unit 24 serves to execute instructions for software, such as temporal scope program 38, that may be loaded into memory 26. Processor unit 24 may be a set of one or more processors, or may be a multi-processor core, depending on the particular implementation. Further, processor unit 24 may be implemented using one or more heterogeneous processor systems in which a main processor is present with secondary processors on a single chip. As another illustrative example, processor unit 24 may be a symmetric multi-processor system containing multiple processors of the same type.
Memory 26 and persistent storage 28 are examples of computer-readable storage devices 36. Memory 26, in these examples, may be, for example, a random access memory or any other suitable volatile or non-volatile computer-readable storage device. Persistent storage 28 may take various forms depending on the particular implementation. For example, persistent storage 28 may contain one or more components or devices. For example, persistent storage 28 may be a hard drive, a flash memory, a rewritable optical disk, a rewritable magnetic tape, or some combination of the above. The media used by persistent storage 28 also may be removable. For example, a removable hard drive may be used for persistent storage 28.
Communications unit 30, in these examples, provides for communications with other data processing systems or devices. In these examples, communications unit 30 is a network interface card. Communications unit 30 may provide communications through the use of either or both physical and wireless communication links.
Input/output unit 32 allows for input and output of data with other devices that may be connected to data processing system 20. For example, input/output unit 32 may provide a connection for user input through a keyboard, a mouse, and/or some other suitable input device. Further, input/output unit 32 may send output to a printer. Display 34 provides a mechanism to display information to a user.
Instructions for an operating system, applications, and/or programs may be located in one or more of computer-readable storage devices 36. Computer-readable storage devices 36 are in communication with processor unit 24 through communications fabric 22. In these illustrative examples the instructions are in a functional form on persistent storage 28. These instructions may be loaded into memory 26 for running by processor unit 24. The processes of the different embodiments may be performed by processor unit 24 using program instructions, which may be located in a memory, such as memory 26.
These program instructions are referred to as program code, computer usable program code, or computer-readable program code, that may be read and run by a processor in processor unit 24. The program code in the different embodiments may be embodied on different physical or tangible computer-readable media, such as memory 26 or persistent storage 28.
Temporal scope program 38 is located in a functional form on one or more computer-readable storage devices 40. One or more of computer-readable storage devices 40 may be selectively removable. Temporal scope program 38 may be loaded onto or transferred to data processing system 20 for running by processor unit 24. Temporal scope program 38 and computer-readable storage devices 40 form computer program product 42 in these examples. In some instances, one or more of computer-readable storage devices 40 may not be removable.
Alternatively, temporal scope program 38 may be transferred to data processing system 20 from computer-readable storage devices 40 through a communications link to communications unit 30 and/or through a connection to input/output unit 32. The communications link and/or the connection may be physical or wireless in the illustrative examples.
In some illustrative embodiments, temporal scope program 38 may be downloaded over a network to persistent storage 28 from another device or data processing system for use within data processing system 20. For instance, program code stored in a computer-readable storage device in a server data processing system may be downloaded over a network from the server to data processing system 20. The data processing system providing temporal scope program 38 may be a server computer, a client computer, or some other device capable of storing and transmitting temporal scope program 38.
The different components illustrated for data processing system 20 are not meant to provide architectural limitations to the manner in which different embodiments may be implemented. The different illustrative embodiments may be implemented in a data processing system including components in addition to, or in place of, those illustrated for data processing system 20. Other components shown in
As another example, a bus system may be used to implement communications fabric 22 and may be comprised of one or more buses, such as a system bus or an input/output bus. Of course, the bus system may be implemented using any suitable type of architecture that provides for a transfer of data between different components or devices attached to the bus system. Additionally, a communications unit may include one or more devices used to transmit and receive data, such as a modem or a network adapter. Further, a memory may be, for example, memory 26 or a cache such as found in an interface and memory controller hub that may be present in communications fabric 22.
The IMR architecture system 100 includes federated physical model assets 103 that are stored in different types of repositories depending on the model driven framework tools and products that are being deployed by the IMR architecture system 100. The federated physical assets may include framework, industry models, business models, unified modeling language (UML) design applications, data models, business services, service components, and technical services. The federated physical assets are not limited to the assets shown in
Applications and services 106 are provided to IMR users 108 through the network 109 (e.g. intranet or Internet) or network 2 of
The applications and services 106 may include registration and profile management; creating and customizing repository meta-model; importing customized and disparate model/data into the repository; examining/decomposing complex diagrams and structures; structure, link, and trace change disparate model/assets; advanced search and query, navigate/browse data assets; select and download model/assets; customize/add models/assets submit for repository upload; and impact analysis. The application and services are not limited to the assets shown in
MAINTAINING SCOPE IN A SERVICE ORIENTED ARCHITECTURE INDUSTRY MODEL REPOSITORY” filed Dec. 17, 2009 as application Ser. No. 12/640,852; and “RECOGNITION OF AND SUPPORT FOR MULTIPLE VERSIONS OF AN ENTERPRISE CANONICAL MESSAGE MODEL” filed Dec. 17, 2009 as application Ser. No. 12/640,865. The interfaces 107 are further described in greater detail in an application entitled, “SERVICE ORIENTED ARCHITECTURE INDUSTRY MODEL REPOSITORY META-MODEL WITH A STANDARD BASED INDEX” filed Dec. 17, 2009.
The IMR users 108 may include but are not limited to a repository administrator, a model manager, a system architect, and a business analyst.
The internal meta-model service 202 of the SOA IMR component 102 is an SOA IMR meta-model service and preferably uses at least one topic map meta-model 210 that is an ISO Standard topic map meta-model. Topic Maps are an ISO/IEC standard (ISO 13250-1) and map both web and real-world information resources, by reifying real-world resources as “subjects” and creating “topic” constructs to capture their characteristics and relationships with other topics and subjects. By using the meta-models 206, 208, and 210 as the physical asset repository 204 internal meta-model, an interface of the common meta-model service 202 allows users to programmatically access, manage, and maintain these meta-models.
A meta-model based on topic maps can be built using a number of technologies such as topic map related ISO/IEC standards (ISO 13250-1) and individual semantic technologies such as web ontology language (OWL), resource description framework (RDF) and SPARQL protocol and RDF query language (SPARQL).
Unified Modeling Language (UML) meta-models may be used to present artifacts of an object-oriented software-intensive system under development. The UML meta-model may be of an object-oriented software-intensive system that is part of the network data processing system 1 shown in
The SOA IMR meta-model service 202 maps the at least one topic map meta-models 210 to an OWL representation of the at least one topic map meta-models 210. The industry model repository (IMR) provides the context for the implementation of mapping the at least one topic map meta-model 210 to the OWL representations of the at least one topic map meta-model 210. The OWL representation of the at least one topic map meta-model 210 are stored in a resource description framework (RDF) semantic web repository 218. An example of semantic web repository 218 is a Sesame RDF Server which is an open source framework for querying and analyzing RDF data. Semantic web repository 218 preferably allows for versioning and merging of asset-requirement topic maps and therefore allows topic maps to be built up by different domain experts to be organized in conceptual spaces according to meaning and by temporal scope or time.
In accordance with one embodiment of the present invention, a method of expressing a meta-model is provided. The meta-model may have temporal dependent relationships or no temporal dependent relationships, such that time or temporal variance is treated orthogonal to the model and mathematical set theory can be used to create, maintain, and validate the model with a high degree of accuracy. The method can also show evolution of the model over time through at least two different times or temporal scopes. The meta-model may also display relevant subsets of the information to the end user based on user criteria such as time and relationships. Therefore, unlike the prior art, snap shots of specific time points through the evolution of the meta-model may be viewed by a user.
Referring to
a-7b shows a flowchart of an exemplary implementation of a method of taking in a topic and all of the locations of the topic on an RDF server and a particular repository to be used for persisting the resulting RDF in which illustrative embodiments may be implemented. It will be understood that, in one exemplary implementation, each block or combination of blocks shown in
Referring to
Topic occurrence RDF statements or RDF triples are created (step 360) to be sent to the RDF repository. To create a topic occurrence RDF statement or RDF triple (step 360), an occurrence of the topic with data specific to temporal scope in the temporal scope topic map meta-model is read (step 362) and a topic occurrence RDF statement or RDF triple based on the occurrence of the topic with data specific to temporal scope is created (step 364). The topic occurrence RDF statement or RDF triple is added to the RDF repository (step 366). If there are additional occurrences of the topic with data specific to temporal scope in the topic map (step 368), the steps of creating a topic occurrence RDF statement or RDF triple (step 364) and adding a topic occurrence RDF statement to the RDF repository (step 366) are repeated until no more occurrence of the topic on the temporal scope topic map meta-model occur.
When no occurrences remain, the topic attribute RDF statements or RDF triples are created (step 371) to be sent to the RDF repository. To create a topic attribute RDF statement or RDF triple (step 371), an attribute of the topic with data specific to temporal scope in the temporal scope topic map meta-model is read (step 372), and a topic attribute RDF statement or RDF triple based on the attribute of the topic with data specific to temporal scope is created (step 374). The topic attribute RDF statement or RDF triple is added to the RDF repository, such as RDF semantic web repository 218 (step 376). If there are additional attributes of the topic with data specific to temporal scope in the topic map (step 378), the steps of creating a topic attribute RDF statement or RDF triple (step 374) and adding a topic attribute RDF statement to the RDF repository (step 376) are repeated until no more attribute of the topic on the temporal scope topic map meta-model occur.
When no attributes remain, the method of taking in a topic and all of the locations of the topic on the RDF server and the particular repository to be used for persisting the resulting RDF ends. All of the locations of the topic on the RDF server and the particular repository to be used for persisting the resulting RDF triples are accounted for and the resource description framework triples specific to temporal scope are persisted into the RDF repository (step 506).
Returning to
In
In the first temporal situation shown in
In the second temporal situation, shown in
In viewing the model in the second temporal situation, the relationship that was originally present in a different temporal scope between Component B 302 and Interface1304 would not be apparent, since temporal scope is the measured or measurable period during which an action, process, or condition exists or continues.
In other words, for example, in the first temporal situation, the topic map of the model indicates the architecture of a subway system as present in 1960 and in the second temporal situation, the topic map of the model indicates the architecture of the same subway system as present in 2010. The subway system in 2010 now offers “Station” Component C, which is deployed from an “originating stop” Node1 and offers “Destination Station” Interface1. In 1960, “Station” Component C was not present and could not be used to get to “Destination Station” Interface1, instead, “Station” Component B offered the only means to offer “Destination Station” Interface1 as a location in the “subway”.
One example of how all topics, occurrences, and attributes from each temporal scope topic map meta-models are converted into resource description framework triples specific to temporal scopes (step 505) may be carried out is to implement the ISO topic map of the UML meta-model to a web ontology language (OWL) representation of the topic map. The industry model repository (IMR) provides the context for the implementation of the at least one topic map meta-models 210 to the OWL representation of the topic maps. The OWL representation of the topic map is preferably stored in a resource description framework (RDF) semantic web repository. An example of a semantic web repository is a Sesame RDF Server which is an open source framework for querying and analyzing RDF data. The RDF repository preferably allows for versioning and merging of topic maps through different temporal scopes and therefore allows topic maps to be built up by different domain experts to be organized into conceptual spaces by a measured or measurable period during which an action, process, or condition exists or continues meaning.
As shown, a relationship ‘is’ present between a Concept and Component A 306, Component B 302, Node1308, Interface1304 and Component C 310, indicated by the solid line 320. Interface1304 ‘uses’ Component A 306 as indicated by the dotted line 322. Node1308 ‘deploys’ Component C 310, Component B 302, and Component A 306 as indicated by the dashed line 324. Interface1304 ‘offers’ Component C 310 and Component B 302 as indicated by the dash-dot-dot lines 326.
In referring back to
As discussed above, the semantic web RDF repository allows for versioning and merging of asset-requirement topic maps. With versioning and merging of asset-requirement topic maps, topic maps may be built by different domain experts and organized in conceptual spaces according to meaning.
For example, a domain expert could build up an asset—requirements topic map in an information service space of the SOA and another domain expert could build an assets-requirements topic map in an integration services space of the SOA. Both maps could then be easily merged together to provide multiple view on the topic map based on the role of whom is using them. A user would only need to see the relevant subset of the asset-requirement topic map to help understand what particular assets are relevant to his requirements. An asset requirements domain expert would only see the relevant services topic map for his domain. An asset-requirements topic map administrator would be able to see and navigate the entire map and create new association types of new topic types. More specifically, a legacy application asset domain expert could build up in a series of time dependent snap shots topic maps of a legacy application asset environment (e.g. all legacy application assets in a particular insurance company and how those legacy applications changed over time.) A user interested in a historical perspective would only see the relevant subset of legacy applications assets topic map to help understand what particular assets existed at a particular point in time.
By providing an implementation for converting the SOA IMR topic map meta-model to a semantic representation, the standards based query language of SPARQL Protocol and RDF Query Language (SPARQL) may be used to query the SOA IMR topic map meta-model. SPARQL allows for very fast querying, and will scale to millions of data items. Another advantage is that the requirement maps are maintained and information is kept up to date. By using a standards based query language, search and query requirement maps may be used to understand the suitable industry model assets or combinations of assets to be used for a particular set of requirements. Querying of relevant information about a particular model asset can be carried out using the standard based query language, such as where the particular model asset can be found and what assets the particular model asset can be used in conjunction with new information. The new information may be associations between assets that can be uncovered using inference technology such as semantic web based query languages, for example, SPARQL, to provide answers to queries across the asset-requirements topic maps. The selection of an RDF based repository like Sesame provides support for the kind of querying to determine that all of the assets can be used to satisfy a particular requirement or temporal scope, even though some assets do not have explicit relationships with the requirement.
By using semantic web technologies of the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), such as OWL and RDF a user has the OWL capabilities and tools for expressing constraints, doing constraint checking and automated reasoning/inference, and for querying and visualization of ontology. In addition using semantic web technologies for converting the SOA IMR topic map meta-model to an OWL-DL representation also has many additional benefits. Using semantic web technology allows the complex model-model, model requirement, and requirement-requirement associations both abstract and instance data to be expressed mathematically in the form of triples (subject, predicate) which may be continuously checked for consistency to ensure the integrity of the data. Automatic tools can be used for consistency checking Additional constrains can also be introduced depending on the particular industry model. Since the semantic web technologies are mathematically based, inference of the data can be performed to identify new associations. By using standard XML based technologies of the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) such as OWL and RDF, a variety of tools such as security can be leveraged. Controlled access to the topic maps, maps or subsection of the maps is supported using the family of XML security based standards.
The flowchart and block diagrams in the Figures illustrate the architecture, functionality, and operation of possible implementations of systems, methods and computer program products according to various embodiments of the present invention. In this regard, each block in the flowchart or block diagrams may represent a module, segment, or portion of code, which comprises one or more executable instructions for implementing the specified logical function(s). It should also be noted that, in some alternative implementations, the functions noted in the block may occur out of the order noted in the figures. For example, two blocks shown in succession may, in fact, be executed substantially concurrently, or the blocks may sometimes be executed in the reverse order, depending upon the functionality involved. It will also be noted that each block of the block diagrams and/or flowchart illustration, and combinations of blocks in the block diagrams and/or flowchart illustration, can be implemented by special purpose hardware-based systems that perform the specified functions or acts, or combinations of special purpose hardware and computer instructions.
The terminology used herein is for the purpose of describing particular embodiments only and is not intended to be limiting of the invention. As used herein, the singular forms “a”, “an” and “the” are intended to include the plural forms as well, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise. It will be further understood that the terms “comprises” and/or “comprising,” when used in this specification, specify the presence of stated features, integers, steps, operations, elements, and/or components, but do not preclude the presence or addition of one or more other features, integers, steps, operations, elements, components, and/or groups thereof.
The corresponding structures, materials, acts, and equivalents of all means or step plus function elements in the claims below are intended to include any structure, material, or act for performing the function in combination with other claimed elements as specifically claimed. The description of the present invention has been presented for purposes of illustration and description, but is not intended to be exhaustive or limited to the invention in the form disclosed. Many modifications and variations will be apparent to those of ordinary skill in the art without departing from the scope and spirit of the invention. The embodiment was chosen and described in order to best explain the principles of the invention and the practical application, and to enable others of ordinary skill in the art to understand the invention for various embodiments with various modifications as are suited to the particular use contemplated.
Having thus described the invention of the present application in detail and by reference to embodiments thereof, it will be apparent that modifications and variations are possible without departing from the scope of the invention defined in the appended claims.
This application is a continuation-in-part of parent patent application Ser. No. 12/640,697, filed Dec. 17, 2009, entitled, “IMPLEMENTING SERVICE ORIENTED ARCHITECTURE INDUSTRY MODEL REPOSITORY USING SEMANTIC WEB TECHNOLOGIES”.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
5970490 | Morgenstern | Oct 1999 | A |
6169992 | Beall et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6256773 | Bowman-Amuah | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6292932 | Baisley et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6300947 | Kanevsky | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6363353 | Chen | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6377934 | Chen et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6381743 | Mutschler, III | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6411961 | Chen | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6539396 | Bowman-Amuah | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6658644 | Bishop et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
6684386 | Baisley | Jan 2004 | B1 |
6789252 | Burke et al. | Sep 2004 | B1 |
6799174 | Chipman et al. | Sep 2004 | B2 |
7080064 | Sundaresan | Jul 2006 | B2 |
7099859 | Sundaresan | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7103871 | Kirkpatrick et al. | Sep 2006 | B1 |
7225241 | Yada | May 2007 | B2 |
7284196 | Skeen et al. | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7313575 | Carr et al. | Dec 2007 | B2 |
7318055 | Britton | Jan 2008 | B2 |
7366706 | Chang et al. | Apr 2008 | B2 |
7412457 | Saracco et al. | Aug 2008 | B2 |
7428582 | Bean et al. | Sep 2008 | B2 |
7483973 | An et al. | Jan 2009 | B2 |
7526501 | Albahari et al. | Apr 2009 | B2 |
7546295 | Brave et al. | Jun 2009 | B2 |
7630877 | Brown et al. | Dec 2009 | B2 |
7698398 | Lai | Apr 2010 | B1 |
7711836 | Videlov et al. | May 2010 | B2 |
7716279 | Savchenko et al. | May 2010 | B2 |
7761406 | Harken | Jul 2010 | B2 |
7761533 | Angelov | Jul 2010 | B2 |
7769877 | McBride et al. | Aug 2010 | B2 |
7792868 | Finkelstein et al. | Sep 2010 | B2 |
7865820 | Sauer et al. | Jan 2011 | B2 |
7890517 | Angelo et al. | Feb 2011 | B2 |
7979840 | Zhang et al. | Jul 2011 | B2 |
7987163 | Keshavarz-Nia et al. | Jul 2011 | B2 |
8001129 | Arumainayagam et al. | Aug 2011 | B2 |
8010947 | Carbone et al. | Aug 2011 | B2 |
8015541 | Srinivasan et al. | Sep 2011 | B1 |
8024425 | Stoyanova | Sep 2011 | B2 |
8074117 | Wolf et al. | Dec 2011 | B2 |
8156179 | Parmar et al. | Apr 2012 | B2 |
8229881 | Pedro et al. | Jul 2012 | B2 |
8234387 | Bradley et al. | Jul 2012 | B2 |
8301490 | Cornford | Oct 2012 | B2 |
8341155 | Lane | Dec 2012 | B2 |
8346929 | Lai | Jan 2013 | B1 |
8631072 | Damola et al. | Jan 2014 | B2 |
20020059566 | Delcambre et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
20020069102 | Vellante et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020073106 | Parker et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020087315 | Lee et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020116389 | Chen et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020129329 | Nishioka et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020194053 | Barrett et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030009740 | Lan | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030110467 | Balakrishnan | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030135825 | Gertner et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030158851 | Britton et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030172368 | Alumbaugh et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030177481 | Amaru et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030229529 | Mui et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20030233339 | Downs | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20030233631 | Curry et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20040010484 | Foulger et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040107118 | Harnsberger et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040158815 | Potgieter | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040172612 | Kasravi et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040193476 | Aerdts | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20050044197 | Lai | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050050311 | Joseph et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050050549 | Joseph et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050114829 | Robin et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
20050138113 | Brendle et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050154662 | Langenwalter | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050154769 | Eckart et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050166178 | Masticola et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050182744 | Kawabata et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050262191 | Mamou et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050268326 | Bhargavan et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20050278202 | Broomhall et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060004774 | Alcorn | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060015489 | Probst et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060047810 | Herzog et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060053174 | Gardner et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060070083 | Brunswig et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060074980 | Sarkar | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060085750 | Easton, Jr. et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060106804 | Chande | May 2006 | A1 |
20060106824 | Stuhec | May 2006 | A1 |
20060129440 | Frauenhoffer et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060206883 | Sabbouh | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060229896 | Rosen et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060236307 | Debruin et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060241931 | Abu el Ata et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060274222 | Shu | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20070038610 | Omoigui | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070043632 | Abelow | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070073663 | McVeigh et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070088683 | Feroglia et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070094219 | Kipersztok | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070106629 | Endacott et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070112712 | Flinn et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070112803 | Pettovello | May 2007 | A1 |
20070156726 | Levy | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070168479 | Bean et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070179983 | Putman | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070233681 | Ronen et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070239768 | Quinn-Jacobs | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070260476 | Smolen et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070261027 | Dhanakshirur et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070271277 | Ivan et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20080052314 | Batabyal | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20080059630 | Sattler et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080091283 | Balci et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080091448 | Niheu et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080114700 | Moore et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20080126397 | Alexander et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20080127047 | Zhang et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20080133558 | Carlson et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080134137 | Petersen | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080178147 | Meliksetian et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080215358 | Goldszmidt et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20080215400 | Ban et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20080229195 | Brauel et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20080235664 | Carbone et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20080255892 | Orangi et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080270372 | Hsu et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080288944 | Coqueret et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20080313282 | Warila et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20080319947 | Latzina et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20090018996 | Hunt et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090063522 | Fay et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090064087 | Isom | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090077043 | Chang et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090077124 | Spivack et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090089078 | Bursey | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090094112 | Cesarini et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090106234 | Siedlecki et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090109225 | Srivastava et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090112908 | Wintel et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090132211 | Lane et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
20090138293 | Lane et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
20090150860 | Gschwind et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090150981 | Amies et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090157630 | Yuan | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090157801 | Barber et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090158237 | Zhang et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090182610 | Palanisamy et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090182750 | Keyes et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090193057 | Maes | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090193432 | McKegney et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090201917 | Maes et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20090204467 | Rubio et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20090204662 | Meo | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20090210390 | Lane | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20090228425 | Goraya | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090248705 | Ivan et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090254572 | Redlich et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090254876 | Kuriakose et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090281996 | Liu et al. | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20090313335 | Heidasch | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20090319981 | Akkiraju et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20100057677 | Rapp et al. | Mar 2010 | A1 |
20100058113 | Rapp et al. | Mar 2010 | A1 |
20100077386 | Akkiraju et al. | Mar 2010 | A1 |
20100082387 | Cao et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100106656 | Sheth et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100145774 | Veshnyakov et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100146617 | Betts et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100153094 | Lee et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100161629 | Palanisamy et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100174693 | Chandrasekhara et al. | Jul 2010 | A1 |
20100228693 | Dawson et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100250497 | Redlich et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100269099 | Yoshimura et al. | Oct 2010 | A1 |
20100312731 | Knoblauch | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20110035391 | Werner et al. | Feb 2011 | A1 |
20110099050 | Coldicott et al. | Apr 2011 | A1 |
20110099139 | Coldicott et al. | Apr 2011 | A1 |
20110099207 | Brown et al. | Apr 2011 | A1 |
20110099536 | Coldicott et al. | Apr 2011 | A1 |
20110153292 | Lane et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110153293 | Coldicott et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110153608 | Lane et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110153610 | Carrato et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110153636 | Coldicott et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110153767 | Coldicott et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110202326 | Salemann | Aug 2011 | A1 |
20110238610 | Lee et al. | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20120023042 | Das | Jan 2012 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2006215753 | Aug 2006 | JP |
2007113164 | Oct 2007 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Maicher et al.(“Temporal Qualification in Topic Maps”, Fifth International Conference on Topic Maps Research and Applications, TMRA 2009 Leipzig, Germany, Nov. 12-13, 2009. |
Stefanova et al. “Viewing and Querying Topic Maps in terms of RDF”, SeMMA 2008 CEUR Workshop Proceedings, ISSN 1613-0073, online at CEUR-WS.org/Vol-346/. |
Chen, D-W. et al.; “A P2P based Web service discovery mechanism with bounding deployment and publication”; Chinese Journal of Computers; vol. 28; No. 4; pp. 615-626; Apr. 2005. |
Lee, J. et al.; “Semantic and Dynamic Web Service of SOA bsed Smart Robots using Web 2.0 Open API”, 2008; Sixth International Conference on Software Engineering, Research, Management, and Application; pp. 255-260. |
Demirkan, H. et al.; “Service-oriented technology and management: Perspectives on research and practice for the coming decade”; Electronic Commerce Research and Applications vol. 7 Issue 4; Jan. 2008; pp. 356-376. |
Zdun, U. et al.; “Modeling Process-Driven and Service-Oriented Architectures Using Patterns and Pattern Primitives”; ACM Transactions on the Web; vol. 1 No. 3 Article 14; Sep. 2007; 44 pages. |
Simoes, B. et al.; “Enterprise-level Architecture for Interactive Web-based 3D Visualization of Geo-referenced Repositories”; Association for Computing Machinery Inc. 978-1-60558-432-4/09/0006; Jun. 2009; pp. 147-154. |
Kanakalata et al; Performance Opitimization of SOA based AJAX Application; 2009; pp. 89-93. |
Annett et al.; “Building Highly-Interactive, Data-Intensive, REST Applications: The Invenio Experience”; 2008; pp. 1-15. |
Arnold et al.; “Automatic Realization of SOA Deployment Patterns in Distributed Environments”; ICSOC 2008; LNCS 5364; 2008; pp. 162-179. |
R. Hopkins et al.; “Eating the IT Elephant: Moving from Greenfield Development to Brownfield”; Chapter 6; 23 pages. |
Pu et al; Combining MDE and UML to Reverse Engineer Web-Based Legacy System; IEEE; 2008; pp: 718-725. |
R. Barrett; “Model Driven Design of Distribution Patterns for Web Service Compositions” ; 2006; School of Computing; 4 pages. |
Gamatie et al.; “Operational Semantics of the Marte Repetitive Structure Modeling Concepts for Data-Parallel Applications Design”, 2010 Ninth International Symposium on Parallel and Distributed Computing; IEEE; 2010 pp. 25-32. |
Smeda et al.; “Cosastudio: A Software Architecture Modeling Tool”, World Academy of Science, Engineering, and Technology; 2009; pp. 263-266. |
Moroff et al. “OpenArchitectureWare 4.1 RSM/RSA Adapter” www.openarchitecture.org 2009-2010; pp. 1-7. |
Volzer, Hagen, et al. “A tool for subsystem configuration management.” Software Maintenance, 2002. Proceedings. International Conference on. IEEE, 2002. |
Sadiq, Shazia, and Maria Orlowska. “Architectural considerations in systems supporting dynamic workflow modification.” Proceedings of the workshop on Software Architectures for Business Process Management at CAiSE. vol. 99. 1999. |
Sadiq, Wasim, and Maria E. Orlowska. “Analyzing process models using graph reduction techniques.” Information systems 25.2: 117-134 (2000). |
Sadiq, Wasim, and Maria E. Orlowska. “Applying graph reduction techniques for identifying structural conflicts in process models.” Advanced Information Systems Engineering. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 1999. |
Knodel. “Preparing the Organizational ‘Soil’ for Measurable and Sustainable change: Business Value Management and Project Governance.” Journal of Change Management, vol. 4, No. 1, 45-62, Mar. 2004 (Received Jun. 2003). |
Prosci's Change Management Maturity Model Prosci 2004. |
Clarke “The Development of a Best Practice Model for Change Management.” European Management Journal vol. 15, No. S, pp. 537-545, 1997. |
Larsen. “Building SOA applications with reusable assets, Part 1: Reusable assets, recipes, and patterns.” http://www.microsofltranslator.com/BV.aspx?ref=IE8Activity&a=hllp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ibm.com%2Fdeveloperworks%2Fcn%2Fwebservices%2Fws-soa-reuse1 %2./ 2006. |
Larsen. “Building SOA applications with reusable assets, Part 2: SOA recipe reference examples”, http://www.microsofltranslator.com/BV.aspx?ref=IE8Activity&a=hllp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ibm.com%2Fdeveloperworks%2Fcn%2Fwebservices%2Fws-soa-reuse2%2F. 2006. |
Larsen. “Building SOA applications with reusable assets, Part 3: WS response template mode.” http://www.microsofltranslator.com/BV.aspx?ref=IE8Activity&a=http%3A%2%2Fwww.ibm.com%2Fdeveloperworks%2Fcn%2Fwebservices%2Fws-soa-reuse3 %2 F. 2007. |
Ponnalagu “System and Method for Distributed Web Service Adaptation using Aspect oriented Programming”, IBM Technical Disclosure Bulletin, Sep. 15, 2008, pp. 1-3. |
Baum et al., “Mapping Requirements to Reusable Components using Design Spaces”, 2000, Proceedings 4th International Conference on Requirements Engineering, pp. 159-167. |
Hsiung et al., “Vert AF: An Application Framework for the Design and Verification of Embedded Real-Time Software”, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 30, No. 10, Oct. 2004, pp. 656-674. |
Robinson et al., “Finding Reusable UML Sequence Diagrams Automatically”, IEE Software, 2004, pp. 60-67 ˜. |
Jin et al., “Automated Requirements Elicitation: Combining a Model-Driven Approach with Concept Reuse”, International Journal of Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering, vol. 13, No. 1, 2003, pp. 53-82. |
Justin Kelleher, “A Reusable Traceability Framework Using Patterns”, University of Cape Town, ACM Digital Library, 2005, pp. 50-55. |
Sharples et al., “The Design and Implementation of a Mobile Learning Resource”, Educational Technology Research Group, University of Birmingham, ACM Digital Library, 2002, pp. 1-23. |
Min Luo, “Tutorial 1: Common Business Components and Services Toward More Agile and Flexible Industry Solutions and Assets”, 2008 IEEE Congress on Services Part II, pp. 11-12. |
Ying Huang et al., “A Stochastic Service Composition Model for Business Integration”, Proceeds of the International Conference on Next Generation Web Services Practices, 2005 IEEE Computer Society, pp. 1-8. |
Pham et al., “Analysis of Visualisation Requirements for Fuzzy Systems”, 2003 ACM, pp. 181-187. |
van den Heuvel, Willem-Jan, Mike Papazoglou, and Manfred A. Jeusfeld. “Configuring business objects from legacy systems.” Advanced Information Systems Engineering. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 1999. |
Ryan, Kevin, and Brian Mathews. “Matching conceptual graphs as an aid to requirements re-use.” Requirements Engineering, 1993., Proceedings of IEEE International Symposium on. IEEE, 1993. |
Wilde, Norman, et al. “A comparison of methods for locating features in legacy software.” Journal of Systems and Software 65.2 (2003): 1 05-114. |
Heckel, Reiko, et al. “Architectural transformations: From legacy to three-tier and services.” Software Evolution. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2008. 139-170. |
Papazoglou, Mike P., and Willem-Jan van den Heuvel. “Configurable business objects for building evolving enterprise models and applications.” Business Process Management. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2000. 328-344. |
Pepper, Steve. “The TAO of topic maps.” Proceedings of XML Europe. vol. 3. 2000. |
Le Grand, Benedicte, and Michel Soto. “Visualisation of the semantic web: Topic Maps Visualisation.” Information Visualisation, 2002. Proceedings. Sixth International Conference on. IEEE, 2002. |
Bailey J. “Web and Semantic Web Query Languages: A Survey.” Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3564 (2005), pp. 35-133, 2005. |
A. Rauschmayer and P. Renner. Knowledge-Representation-Based Software Engineering, Technical Report 0407, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universitat Munchen, Institut fur Informatik, May 2004. |
Chapter 3. Integration Services; Enterprise Knowledge Infrastructures; 2005, 147-224, DOI: 10.1007/3-540-27514-2—3; pp. 147-224. |
IBM: Best Practices for SAP Business Information Warehouse on DB2 UDB for z/OS VS; ibm redbooks; May 2005; pp. 1-286. |
Hatzigaidas, Athanasios, et al. “Topic Map Existing Tools: A Brief Review.” ICTAMI 2004 (International Conference on Theory and Applications of Mathematics and Informatics). 2004. |
Ahmed et al., An Introduction to Topic Maps, Jul. 2005, pp. 1-15. |
The Moose Book: Subject, model, meta-model, meta-meta-model, http://www.themoosebook.org/book/internals/fame/subjectmodel-meta-model, Copyright 2010-2011, pp. 1-3. |
Dinesh et al., Oracle® Enterprise Repository, User Guide, 1 Og Release 3 (10.3), Jul. 2009, Oracle Corporation, pp. 5, 7, 10-11, 18-19, 21, 37-38, 61, 71, 77, 82, 84. |
Oracle® Enterprise Repository Harvester User Guide, 1 Og Release 3 (10.3), Jul. 2009, Oracle Corporation, pp. 1-1 to 3-14. |
Tuohy et al.Topic Maps and TEI—Using Topic Maps as a Tool for Presenting TEI Documents, Oct. 18, 2007, pp. 1-13. |
Bieberstein, Norbert, Robert G. Laird, and Keith Jones. Executing SOA: a practical guide for the service-oriented architect. IBM Press, 2008. |
List of related applications. Jul. 7, 2014. |
Sam Hunting et al. “XML topic-maps: creating and using topic maps for the Web”, Jul. 16, 2002. |
Cerny, R. “A RESTful Web Service Interface for Topic Maps.” Topincs; 8 pages; 2006. |
W3Schools.com. “XPath Syntax”. https://web.archive.org/web/2010419012316/http://www.w3schools.com/xpath/xpath—syntax.asp; Apr. 2010. |
Blank-Edelman, D. “The 10-Minute XPath Tutorial—Automating System Administration with Perl.” http://web.archive.org/web/20110421043126/http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/perl/excerpts/system-admin-with-perl/ten-minute-xpath-utorial.html, 2011. |
Zhang, S. et al. “Adding Valid Time to XPath.” In Proceedings of the Second International Workshop on Databases in Networked Information Systems (DNIS '02); Subhash Bhalla (Ed); Springer-Verlag, London, UK, UK, pp. 29-42; 2002. |
U.S. Appl. No. 11/944,946; Final Rejection dated May 14, 2012; Non-Final Rejection dated Nov. 2, 2011 and Non-Final Rejection dated Jun. 10, 2011. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/640,624; Notice of Allowance dated Feb. 28, 2014; Final Rejection dated Aug. 29, 2013; Non-Final Rejection dated Feb. 8, 2013; Non Final Rejection dated May 7, 2012; Non-Final Rejection dated Oct. 11, 2011. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/640,697; Notice of Allowance dated Mar. 30, 2012 and Non-Final Rejection dated Oct. 5, 2011. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/533,007; Non-Final Rejection dated Feb. 6, 2015; Final Rejection dated May 23, 2014; Non-Final Rejection dated Sep. 6, 2013. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/605,635; Final Rejection dated Oct. 10, 2013 and Non-Final Rejection dated Dec. 20, 2012. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/604,751; Notice of Allowance dated Aug. 2, 2013 and Non-Final Rejection dated Dec. 6, 2012. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/011,260; Notice of Allowance dated Aug. 13, 2012 and Non-Final Rejection dated Dec. 8, 2011. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/640,749; Notice of Allowance dated Jun. 13, 2013; Final Rejection dated Jun. 27, 2012; Non-Final Rejection dated Dec. 21, 2011. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/605,660; Notice of Allowance dated Sep. 27, 2013; Final Rejection dated Nov. 7, 2012 and Non-Final Rejection dated Dec. 16, 2011. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/605,562; Notice of Allowance dated Dec. 31, 2013; Non-Final Rejection dated Jun. 5, 2013 and Non-Final Rejection dated Dec. 6, 2012. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/640,852; Notice of Allowance dated Dec. 24, 2014; Notice of Allowance dated Sep. 12, 2014; and Non-Final Rejection dated Sep. 17, 2012. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/640,865; Notice of Allowance dated Sep. 3, 2013 and Non-Final Rejection dated Oct. 11, 2012. |
Kreger, H. “Navigating the SOA Open Standards Landscape Around Architecture.” The Open Group, Jul. 2009. |
U.S. Appl. No. 11/942,191; Non-Final Rejection dated Mar. 4, 2011. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/034,508; Final Rejection dated Jan. 6, 2011 and Non-Final Rejection dated Apr. 19, 2010. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20110153610 A1 | Jun 2011 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 12640697 | Dec 2009 | US |
Child | 13018909 | US |