WS‐ReliableMessaging specification describes a protocol that allows messages to be delivered reliably between distributed applications in the presence of software component…
Abstract
Purpose
WS‐ReliableMessaging specification describes a protocol that allows messages to be delivered reliably between distributed applications in the presence of software component, system, or network failures. However, it ensures reliable communication only in the context of two sites – it does not provide any means for consistent termination of the executions spanning over more than two sites. This paper aims to address this issue.
Design/methodology/approach
The paper presents the Reliable WS‐AtomicTransaction protocol, and illustrates its implementation by exploiting WS‐Coordination, which describes an extensible framework for providing protocols that coordinate the actions of distributed applications. The paper also presents the ontology of the log, which is maintained by the Reliable WS‐AtomicTransaction protocol. The ontology is presented in a graphical form and in OWL.
Findings
The introduction of an atomic commitment protocol and its termination protocol increase the reliability of the executions of distributed applications in service‐oriented architectures. On the other hand, it complicates the management of distributed applications as the atomic commitment protocol has to maintain the log that is used by its termination protocol.
Originality/value
The paper presents an atomic commitment protocol and its termination protocol, which is failure resilient and non‐blocking as long as a failed site can communicate with a process that has received sufficient information to know whether the transaction will be committed or aborted. Decreasing the amount of blockings is important because blocking can cause processes to wait for an arbitrarily long period of time.
Details
Keywords
This paper aims to report work on achieving semantic interoperability in electronic auctions. In particular, it considers the advantages and drawbacks of using hard‐coding and…
Abstract
Purpose
This paper aims to report work on achieving semantic interoperability in electronic auctions. In particular, it considers the advantages and drawbacks of using hard‐coding and using semantic messages in the communication between the auction system and the participants of the auction.
Design/methodology/approach
It is demonstrated that although XML‐documents are commonly used for information exchange they do not provide any means of talking about the semantics (i.e. meaning) data. It is also shown that by expressing exchanged documents by resource description framework (RDF) the semantics of the messages can be captured in the message.
Findings
It is recognized that hard‐coding is proven to be a valuable and powerful way for an exchange of structured and persistent business documents (messages). However, if we use hard‐coding in the case of non‐persistent documents and non‐static markets we will encounter problems in deploying new auction policies and extending the system by new participants.
Practical implications
The introduction of the RDF‐technology in message exchange is challenging as it incorporates Semantic web technologies into many parts of the auction system, e.g. on data stores and query languages. The introduction of this technology is also an investment. The investment on new Semantic web technology includes a variety of costs including software, hardware and training costs.
Originality/value
By automating electronic auctions both buyers and sellers can benefit as they can achieve cost reductions and shorten the duration of the auction processes. Also new auction formats can be easily deployed.