基于WSMO的遥感影像处理服务语义描述与注册共享机制研究
|
摘要
多平台、多传感器、多角度、高空间分辨率、高光谱分辨率和高时相分辨率的遥感影像作为空间信息的重要组成部分,日益广泛地应用于国土资源调查、农作物估产、森林资源普查、基础测绘、城市规划、重大灾害与环境事件评估等多个领域。遥感应用领域的不断增多和应用技术的不断深化,对以数据为中心的共享方式提出了挑战。用户对于遥感信息的需求不再仅限于简单的、初级的遥感影像数据,而是经过专业化遥感数字影像处理后所获得的高级影像产品和知识。用户个性化的需求也进一步决定了需要通过复杂的处理流程和多样的处理算法来提取各类信息和知识,单一的遥感影像处理软件已经很难应对如此众多的用户需求。因而,通过服务的方式对外提供遥感影像处理功能,并依据用户需求智能化、自动化地发现、选择、组合、调用、执行各类分布式异构的遥感影像处理功能,不断深化遥感影像处理服务的共享与语义互操作的层次,成为了今后相当长一段时间内的重要研究课题。
遥感影像处理服务共享与语义互操作的前提条件之一是建立其语义描述,OWL-S、WSMO等多种语义描述方法的并存为遥感影像处理服务语义描述提供了广泛的选择。OWL-S提出时间相对较早,发展时间较长,拥有众多支持工具,因而在空间信息服务语义描述中占据了主流。但由于OWL-S所基于的本体语言OWL在概念层次和形式化属性定义方面存在诸多限制,因而只能对输入输出条件进行语义标注,却无法清楚明确的表达输入输出条件相互之间的关系。WSMO相对于OWL-S提供了更完善的概念化模型和形式化理论,提供了不同层次的逻辑语言家族,联合了概念建模与规则表达,平衡了服务的逻辑表达与可计算性,从而更适合表达不同层次的遥感影像处理服务语义,支持不同层次的共享与语义互操作。
本文以遥感影像处理服务为研究对象,针对其语法描述存在的不足以及遥感影像处理种类的多样性、处理模型的特殊性、处理算法的复杂性等特点,研究基于WSMO的遥感影像处理服务语义描述与注册共享机制。重点围绕基于WSMO的遥感影像处理服务的语义描述方法、基于WSMO的遥感影像处理领域本体的构建方式,基于WSMO的语义注册共享机制等多个方面的问题开展研究,形成了遥感影像处理服务语义注册共享的有效解决方案,主要的研究内容及其创新之处如下：
(1)通过分析现有的遥感影像处理服务语法描述的的问题与不足,指出遥感影像处理服务语义描述的重要性和必要性。进一步通过归纳对比现有的各类语义Web服务框架的优缺点,从平衡逻辑表达的复杂性和服务发现的可计算性出发,选择提供多层次语义描述的Web服务建模本体(WSMO)建立遥感影像处理服务语义描述框架,为语义层次的遥感影像处理服务共享奠定理论基础。
(2)依据现有的遥感领域标准规范和典型遥感影像处理软件功能模块定义,划分遥感影像处理种类,确定遥感影像处理流程,梳理各个功能模块的输入输出语义。同时,针对现有的ISO19115-2标准对于处理服务输入输出语义表达的不足,扩展了IS019115-2规范,增加了景信息、扫描质量信息、轨道信息、传感器信息、波段信息、定标信息和成像辅助信息等实体和元素,形成了完整的遥感影像元数据描述模型。在此基础上结合现有的本体构建方法,提出通过五个阶段的开发,实现遥感影像处理领域本体的规范化、概念化、形式化以及本体的维护,构建了遥感影像数据类型本体和基于ISO19119分类的遥感影像处理操作本体。进一步利用WSMO框架提供的Web服务建模语言(WSML)实现了遥感影像数据类型本体和遥感影像处理服务操作本体的形式化描述,为遥感影像处理服务的语义标注提供了本体支持。
(3)为了实现基于WSMO描述的多层次遥感影像处理服务语义的统一组织和管理,本文研究了基于WSMO的语义注册共享机制。一方面通过分析现有主流注册中心的信息模型和语义扩展实现方法,提出了支持基于WSMO的遥感影像处理服务语义描述的注册信息模型扩展方案,使注册中心既能支持传统的基于WSDL或IS019119组织的语法层次的遥感影像元数据,又增加了对利用WSML描述的多层次服务语义的支持。另一方面,为了兼容现有的目录服务接口,通过扩展传统目录服务的发布、发现消息协议,实现了不同层次遥感影像处理服务语义描述的独立发布、发现以及与现有的基于语法描述服务元数据信息的捆绑式发布与发现。
(4)针对WSMO框架下的各类语义匹配服务算法,开展了遥感影像处理服务的发现实验。从满足不同层次用户需求的角度出发,提出了支持Lightweight-DL、Lightweight-Rule、Heavyweight-Rule等不同层次服务发现匹配的统一处理框架,从而实现遥感影像处理服务的不同层次的语义注册共享机制。
(5)基于上述研究的理论成果,构建遥感影像处理服务语义注册共享原型系统,实现了基于WSMO框架的多层次服务语义描述的组织和存储,以及兼容现有OGC目录服务规范的语义扩展交互协议,验证了本文提出的基于WSMO的遥感影像处理服务注册共享的理论,论证了研究的科学性和可行性。
Remote sensing images derived from multi-platform, multi-sensor, multi-angle, high spatial resolution, high spectral resolution and high phase resolution become an import part of spatial information, which are applied in many domains, including land-use survey, crop yield assessment, forest resources survey, basic mapping, urban planning, assessment of major disasters and environmental events, etc. The growing field of remote sensing applications and the deepening technology of remote sensing applications challenge the sharing of data-centric approach. User demand for remote sensing information is not only raw data and primary products but also advanced imaging products and knowledge which processing by specialized remote sensing digital image processing. The user's individual requirements also decide complexity of processing and diversity of algorithm. Single remote sensing image processing software has been very difficult to cope with such a large number of user needs. Thus, providing remote sensing image processing by service, facilitating automated Web service discovery, composition, interoperation and invocation, deepening the level of service sharing and semantic interoperability become an important research topic in future.
Semantic description supplies Web service providers with a core set of markup language constructs for describing the properties and capabilities of their Web services in unambiguous, computer-intepretable form, which is the prerequisite of semantic sharing and interoperability. OWL-S, WSMO and other methods provide a wide range of choices for the semantic description of remote sensing image processing services. OWL-S appears earlier and has a number of support tools, which are the most salient initiatives to describe Semantic Web Services and occupy the mainstream in semantic geospatial domain. However, OWL-S is based on OWL which has serious limitations both on a conceptual level and with respect to some of its formal properties. Therefore, the type of inputs and outputs can be semantically annotated but the relation between them cannot be captured. These unresolved issues were the main motivation to provide an alternative, uinified language for WSMO. WSMO provides a family of layered logical languages which combines conceptual modelling with rules. The various languages of the WSML family of ontology languages provide different expressiveness and different computational guarantees, which is more appropriate to describe the different levels of semantic description for the remote sensing image processing services and support different levels of sharing and semantic interoperability.
In this paper, we choose the remote sensing image processing services as the research object. We fouce on the shortcomings of syntax description and combine the feature of remote sensing image processing, including types of diversity, the processing model are unique, the complexity of processing algorithms, etc. This paper researches on semantic description and registry mechanism of remote sensing image processing service based on WSMO. The study includes semantic description of remote sensing image processing service based on the WSMO, domain ontologies of remote sensing image processing based on WSMO, semantic registry mechanism based on WSMO, etc. The main contents of this paper are as follows:
(1) We analysis the problems and shortcomings of syntax description for remote sensing image processing service, then point out that importance and necessity of semanctic description. After comparing various existing advantages and disadvantages of semantic web services framework, we choose WSMO as the semantic web services framework of remote sensing image processing service. Because WSMO provide a rich family of logic languages organised along two main branches, corresponding to description logics and logic programming and enables a better trade-off between expressiveness and tractability. It lays a theoretical foundation for semantic sharing of remote sensing image processing service.
(2) According to the existing standards and norms in remote sensing domain and function module of some typical remote sensing image processing software. We divide the category of remote sensing image processing service, identify the process of remote sensing image processing service, extract input and output semantics from functional module. At the same time, in order to clarify the expression of input/output semantics, we extended ISO19115-2 standard, adding quality information, track information, sensor information, band information, calibration information and imaging supporting information, then this paper form a complete meta-data description model of remote sensing image. On this basis, we propose to build domain ontologies of remote sensing through the five stages of developmentand implement ontology standardization, conceptualization, formalization, as well as the maintenance of body. Then, we built the remote sensing image data type ontology and ISO19119-based classification of remote sensing image processing operations ontology firstly and implement the formalization based on WSML, which provide the support for semantic annotation of remote sensing image processing service,
(3) In order to unify organization and management of multi-level semantic description of remote sensing image processing services based on WSMO, this paper researches on semantic registry mechanism based on WSMO. On the one hand, we analysis the mainstream method for semantic registry, propose the semantic registry information model which is used to organize the syntax metadata and semantic description which is formalized by WSML variant. On the other hand, in order to compatibility with existing interface of catalogue service, we extend the protocol of traditional catalogue service, including publishing and discovery message, then we implement publishing and discovery of different levels semantic description, or binding with syntax metadata.
(4) Aiming at different types of semantic matching algorithm, we test discovery mechanism of remote sensing image processing services. Then, we propose a unified processing framework for different semantic matching algorithm, including Lightweight-DL, Lightweight-Rule, Heavyweight-Rule, which could support different User needs and different levels of semantic registration of sharing mechanism.
(5) Based on the theoretical results of the study, this paper develops the semantic registration prototype system for sharing remote sensing image processing services, implements the organization and storage of semantic description of the services, and extends the semantic message protocol based on catalogue service criterion. Thus, this prototype system demonstrates scientific character and feasibility of our research.
遥感影像处理服务共享与语义互操作的前提条件之一是建立其语义描述,OWL-S、WSMO等多种语义描述方法的并存为遥感影像处理服务语义描述提供了广泛的选择。OWL-S提出时间相对较早,发展时间较长,拥有众多支持工具,因而在空间信息服务语义描述中占据了主流。但由于OWL-S所基于的本体语言OWL在概念层次和形式化属性定义方面存在诸多限制,因而只能对输入输出条件进行语义标注,却无法清楚明确的表达输入输出条件相互之间的关系。WSMO相对于OWL-S提供了更完善的概念化模型和形式化理论,提供了不同层次的逻辑语言家族,联合了概念建模与规则表达,平衡了服务的逻辑表达与可计算性,从而更适合表达不同层次的遥感影像处理服务语义,支持不同层次的共享与语义互操作。
本文以遥感影像处理服务为研究对象,针对其语法描述存在的不足以及遥感影像处理种类的多样性、处理模型的特殊性、处理算法的复杂性等特点,研究基于WSMO的遥感影像处理服务语义描述与注册共享机制。重点围绕基于WSMO的遥感影像处理服务的语义描述方法、基于WSMO的遥感影像处理领域本体的构建方式,基于WSMO的语义注册共享机制等多个方面的问题开展研究,形成了遥感影像处理服务语义注册共享的有效解决方案,主要的研究内容及其创新之处如下：
(1)通过分析现有的遥感影像处理服务语法描述的的问题与不足,指出遥感影像处理服务语义描述的重要性和必要性。进一步通过归纳对比现有的各类语义Web服务框架的优缺点,从平衡逻辑表达的复杂性和服务发现的可计算性出发,选择提供多层次语义描述的Web服务建模本体(WSMO)建立遥感影像处理服务语义描述框架,为语义层次的遥感影像处理服务共享奠定理论基础。
(2)依据现有的遥感领域标准规范和典型遥感影像处理软件功能模块定义,划分遥感影像处理种类,确定遥感影像处理流程,梳理各个功能模块的输入输出语义。同时,针对现有的ISO19115-2标准对于处理服务输入输出语义表达的不足,扩展了IS019115-2规范,增加了景信息、扫描质量信息、轨道信息、传感器信息、波段信息、定标信息和成像辅助信息等实体和元素,形成了完整的遥感影像元数据描述模型。在此基础上结合现有的本体构建方法,提出通过五个阶段的开发,实现遥感影像处理领域本体的规范化、概念化、形式化以及本体的维护,构建了遥感影像数据类型本体和基于ISO19119分类的遥感影像处理操作本体。进一步利用WSMO框架提供的Web服务建模语言(WSML)实现了遥感影像数据类型本体和遥感影像处理服务操作本体的形式化描述,为遥感影像处理服务的语义标注提供了本体支持。
(3)为了实现基于WSMO描述的多层次遥感影像处理服务语义的统一组织和管理,本文研究了基于WSMO的语义注册共享机制。一方面通过分析现有主流注册中心的信息模型和语义扩展实现方法,提出了支持基于WSMO的遥感影像处理服务语义描述的注册信息模型扩展方案,使注册中心既能支持传统的基于WSDL或IS019119组织的语法层次的遥感影像元数据,又增加了对利用WSML描述的多层次服务语义的支持。另一方面,为了兼容现有的目录服务接口,通过扩展传统目录服务的发布、发现消息协议,实现了不同层次遥感影像处理服务语义描述的独立发布、发现以及与现有的基于语法描述服务元数据信息的捆绑式发布与发现。
(4)针对WSMO框架下的各类语义匹配服务算法,开展了遥感影像处理服务的发现实验。从满足不同层次用户需求的角度出发,提出了支持Lightweight-DL、Lightweight-Rule、Heavyweight-Rule等不同层次服务发现匹配的统一处理框架,从而实现遥感影像处理服务的不同层次的语义注册共享机制。
(5)基于上述研究的理论成果,构建遥感影像处理服务语义注册共享原型系统,实现了基于WSMO框架的多层次服务语义描述的组织和存储,以及兼容现有OGC目录服务规范的语义扩展交互协议,验证了本文提出的基于WSMO的遥感影像处理服务注册共享的理论,论证了研究的科学性和可行性。
Remote sensing images derived from multi-platform, multi-sensor, multi-angle, high spatial resolution, high spectral resolution and high phase resolution become an import part of spatial information, which are applied in many domains, including land-use survey, crop yield assessment, forest resources survey, basic mapping, urban planning, assessment of major disasters and environmental events, etc. The growing field of remote sensing applications and the deepening technology of remote sensing applications challenge the sharing of data-centric approach. User demand for remote sensing information is not only raw data and primary products but also advanced imaging products and knowledge which processing by specialized remote sensing digital image processing. The user's individual requirements also decide complexity of processing and diversity of algorithm. Single remote sensing image processing software has been very difficult to cope with such a large number of user needs. Thus, providing remote sensing image processing by service, facilitating automated Web service discovery, composition, interoperation and invocation, deepening the level of service sharing and semantic interoperability become an important research topic in future.
Semantic description supplies Web service providers with a core set of markup language constructs for describing the properties and capabilities of their Web services in unambiguous, computer-intepretable form, which is the prerequisite of semantic sharing and interoperability. OWL-S, WSMO and other methods provide a wide range of choices for the semantic description of remote sensing image processing services. OWL-S appears earlier and has a number of support tools, which are the most salient initiatives to describe Semantic Web Services and occupy the mainstream in semantic geospatial domain. However, OWL-S is based on OWL which has serious limitations both on a conceptual level and with respect to some of its formal properties. Therefore, the type of inputs and outputs can be semantically annotated but the relation between them cannot be captured. These unresolved issues were the main motivation to provide an alternative, uinified language for WSMO. WSMO provides a family of layered logical languages which combines conceptual modelling with rules. The various languages of the WSML family of ontology languages provide different expressiveness and different computational guarantees, which is more appropriate to describe the different levels of semantic description for the remote sensing image processing services and support different levels of sharing and semantic interoperability.
In this paper, we choose the remote sensing image processing services as the research object. We fouce on the shortcomings of syntax description and combine the feature of remote sensing image processing, including types of diversity, the processing model are unique, the complexity of processing algorithms, etc. This paper researches on semantic description and registry mechanism of remote sensing image processing service based on WSMO. The study includes semantic description of remote sensing image processing service based on the WSMO, domain ontologies of remote sensing image processing based on WSMO, semantic registry mechanism based on WSMO, etc. The main contents of this paper are as follows:
(1) We analysis the problems and shortcomings of syntax description for remote sensing image processing service, then point out that importance and necessity of semanctic description. After comparing various existing advantages and disadvantages of semantic web services framework, we choose WSMO as the semantic web services framework of remote sensing image processing service. Because WSMO provide a rich family of logic languages organised along two main branches, corresponding to description logics and logic programming and enables a better trade-off between expressiveness and tractability. It lays a theoretical foundation for semantic sharing of remote sensing image processing service.
(2) According to the existing standards and norms in remote sensing domain and function module of some typical remote sensing image processing software. We divide the category of remote sensing image processing service, identify the process of remote sensing image processing service, extract input and output semantics from functional module. At the same time, in order to clarify the expression of input/output semantics, we extended ISO19115-2 standard, adding quality information, track information, sensor information, band information, calibration information and imaging supporting information, then this paper form a complete meta-data description model of remote sensing image. On this basis, we propose to build domain ontologies of remote sensing through the five stages of developmentand implement ontology standardization, conceptualization, formalization, as well as the maintenance of body. Then, we built the remote sensing image data type ontology and ISO19119-based classification of remote sensing image processing operations ontology firstly and implement the formalization based on WSML, which provide the support for semantic annotation of remote sensing image processing service,
(3) In order to unify organization and management of multi-level semantic description of remote sensing image processing services based on WSMO, this paper researches on semantic registry mechanism based on WSMO. On the one hand, we analysis the mainstream method for semantic registry, propose the semantic registry information model which is used to organize the syntax metadata and semantic description which is formalized by WSML variant. On the other hand, in order to compatibility with existing interface of catalogue service, we extend the protocol of traditional catalogue service, including publishing and discovery message, then we implement publishing and discovery of different levels semantic description, or binding with syntax metadata.
(4) Aiming at different types of semantic matching algorithm, we test discovery mechanism of remote sensing image processing services. Then, we propose a unified processing framework for different semantic matching algorithm, including Lightweight-DL, Lightweight-Rule, Heavyweight-Rule, which could support different User needs and different levels of semantic registration of sharing mechanism.
(5) Based on the theoretical results of the study, this paper develops the semantic registration prototype system for sharing remote sensing image processing services, implements the organization and storage of semantic description of the services, and extends the semantic message protocol based on catalogue service criterion. Thus, this prototype system demonstrates scientific character and feasibility of our research.
引文
[1]Akkiraju, R., J. Farrell, et al. Web service semantics-WSDL-S.W3C Member Submission,2005.
[2]Akkiraju, R., R. Goodwin, et al. A Method for Semantically Enhancing the Service Discovery Capabilities of UDDI [C]. Proceedings of IJCAI-03 Workshop on Information Integration on the Web,2003.
[3]Alonso, G., F. Casati, et al. Web services:concepts, architectures and applications [M], Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany, October 2003.
[4]Baader, F., D. Calvanese, et al. The Description Logic Handbook [M]. Cambridge University Press New York,2007.
[5]Battle, S., A. Bernstein, et al. Semantic web services framework (SWSF). W3C Member Submission,2005.
[6]Bellwood, T., L. Clement, et al. UDDI Version 3.0. UDDI Spec Technical Committee,2004.
[7]Berners-Lee, T., J. Hendler, et al. The semantic web [J]. Scientific American, 2001,284:28-37.
[8]Bishop, B. and F. Fischer. IRIS-Integrated Rule Inference System [C]. The 5th European Semantic Web Conference,2008.
[9]Bishr, Y. Overcoming the semantic and other barriers to GIS interoperability [J]. International Journal of Geographical Information Science,1998,12 (4): 299-314.
[10]Bruijn, J., C. Bussler, et al. Web Service Modeling Ontology (WSMO), W3C Member Submission,2005.
[11]Ceri, S., G. Gottlob, et al. What You Always Wanted to Know About Datalog (And Never Dared to Ask). IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering,1989,1 (1):146-166.
[12]Chao, K. M., M. Younas, et al. Fuzzy matchmaking for Web services. Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Advanced Information Networking and Applications,2005,721-726.
[13]Chinnici, R., R. Mordani, et al. The Java API for XML Web Services (JAX-WS). Sun Microsystems, Inc,2005.
[14]Christensen, E., F. Curbera, et al. Web services description language 2.0. W3C Candidate Recommendation,2006.
[15]Colgrave, J., R. Akkiraju, et al. External Matching in UDDI [C]. IEEE International Conference on Web Services,2004.
[16]Comite, F. G. D. Content Standard for Digital Geospatial Metadata [S]. Federal. Geographic Data Committee,1998.
[17]Danko, D., L. Reich, et al. ISO 19115 Geographic Information-Metadata [S]. ISO/TC 211,2000.
[18]De Bruijn, J., R. Lara, et al. OWL DL vs. OWL Flight:Conceptual modeling and reasoning for the semantic web [C]. International World Wide Web Conference, 2005,623-632.
[19]de Bruijn, J., H. Lausen, et al. The web service modeling language WSML. WSML Working Draft,2005.
[20]Di, L., A. Chen, et al. The integration of Grid technology with OGC Web Services (OWS) in NWGISS for NASA EOS Data. Proceedings of the. Eighth Global Grid Forum,2003.
[21]Di, L., B. Schlesinger, et al. US FGDC Content Standard for Digital Geospatial Metadata:Extensions for Remote Sensing Metadata [C]. International Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing,2000,33:78-81.
[22]Dogac, A., Y. Kabak, et al. Enriching ebXML registries with OWL ontologies for efficient service discovery [C].14th International Work Shop on Research Issues on Data Engineering,2004.
[23]Dogac, A., Y. Kabak, et al. Enhancing ebXML Registries to Make them OWL Aware [J]. Distributed and Parallel Databases,2005.
[24]Dogac, A., G. B. Laleci, et al. Exploiting ebXML registry semantic constructs for handling archetype metadata in healthcare informatics[J]. International Journal of Metadata, Semantics and Ontologies,2006.
[25]Duchesne P., M. P., Schade S. Semantic annotations in OGC standards. http://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=31102,2008.
[26]Egenhofer, M. J. Toward the semantic geospatial web [C]. Proceedings of the 10th ACM international symposium on Advances in geographic information systems,2002.
[27]Enderton, H. B. A mathematical introduction to logic [M]. Academic press, New York,1972.
[28]FAO. Geonetwork Opensource. http://geonetwork-opensource.org/,2009.
[29]Fellbaum, C. WordNet:An electronic lexical database [M]. MIT press Cambridge, MA,1998.
[30]Fensel, D. and C. Bussler. The web service modeling framework WSMF [J], Electronic Commerce Research and Applications,2002,1:113-137.
[31]Fensel, D., F. Van Harmelen, et al. OIL:An ontology infrastructure for the semantic web [J]. IEEE Intelligent Systems,2001,16 (2):38-45.
[32]Fernandez, M., A. Gomez-Perez, et al. Methontology:From ontological art towards ontological engineering. Spring Symposium Series on Ontological Engineering,1997.
[33]Fitzner, D. and J. Hoffmann. Functional Description of Geoprocessing Services as Conjunctive Queries [C]. Proceedings of the Geographic Information Science, 2007.
[34]Fonseca, F. T. and M. J. Egenhofer. Ontology-driven geographic information systems [M]. ACM New York,1999,14-19.
[35]Fortaleza, C. E. and R. J. Rio de Janeiro. Automatic Discovery and Composition of OGC Web Services.2008
[36]FranciscoCubera, P. B. Understanding WSDL in a UDDI registry [EB/OL]. http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/cn/webservices/ws-uwsdl/part1/index.html, 2001.
[37]Fuger, S., F. Najmi, et al. ebxml registry information model version 3.0. OASISTechnical report [EB/OL]. http://docs. oasis-open. org/regrep-rim/v3.0, 2005.
[38]Gonzalez-Castillo, J., D. Trastour, et al. Description Logics for Matchmaking of Services [R]. HP LABORATORIES TECHNICAL REPORT,2001.
[39]Grosof, B. N., I. Horrocks, et al. Description logic programs:Combining logic programs with description logic [C]. Proceedings of the 12th international conference on World Wide Web,2003.
[40]Gruber, T. R. A translation approach to portable ontology specifications [J]. Knowledge Acquisition,6(2):199-221,1993.
[41]Gruber, T. R. Toward principles for the design of ontologies used for knowledge sharing [J]. International Journal Human-Computer Studies,1995.
[42]Gruninger, M. and M. S. Fox. Methodology for the Design and Evaluation of Ontologies [C]. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Basic Ontological Issues in Knowledge Sharing,1995.
[43]Guarino, N. Formal Ontology in Information Systems [C]. Proceedings of FOIS'98,1998.
[44]Hilbring, D. and T. Uslander. Catalogue Services Enabling Syntactical and Semantic Interoperability in Environmental Risk Management Architectures [C]. Shaker Verlag, Aachen, Proceedings of 20th International Conference on Informatics for Environmental Protection:39-46,2006.
[45]Holsapple, C. W. and K. D. Joshi. A collaborative approach to ontology design. Communications of the ACM,2002.
[46]IANA. http://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/[EB/OL],2007.
[47]O. M. G. Meta object facility (MOF) specification [R] v1.4,2002
[48]ISO/TS 19129. Geographic information--Imagery and gridded data [S],2000.
[49]ISO/PS 19124. Geographic Information--Imagery and gridded data components [S],2000.
[50]ISO 19123. Geographic information--Schema for coverage geometry and functions [S],2005.
[51]ISO 19109. Geographic information -- Rules for application schema [S],2005.
[52]ISO 19115-2 Geographic information--Metadata--Part 2:Extensions for imagery and gridded data [S],2009.
[53]John.R.Jensen. Introductory Digital Image Processing:A Remote Sensing Perspective [M], Third Edition,2007.
[55]Keller, U., R. Lara, et al. Automatic location of services [C]. In Proceedings of the 2nd European Semantic Web Symposium,2005.
[56]Keller, U., R. Lara, et al. WSMO Web Service Discovery [R]. WSMO Deliverable,2004.
[57]Keller, U., H. Lausen, et al. On the semantics of functional descriptions of web services [J]. Lecture Notes in Computer Science,2006.
[58]Kerrigan, M., A. Mocan, et al. The web service modeling toolkit-an integrated development environment for semantic web services [J]. Lecture Notes in Computer Science,2007.
[59]Kietz, J. U., A. Maedche, et al. A method for semi-automatic ontology acquisition from a corporate intranet [C]. Workshop "Ontologies and text",2000.
[60]Kifer, M., G. Lausen, et al. Logical foundations of object-oriented and frame-based languages[J]. Journal of the ACM,1995.
[61]Kim, C. Implementing the ebXML Registry/Repository [J]. XML Journal,2000.
[62]Kim, T. J. Metadata for geo-spatial data sharing:A comparative analysis [J]. The Annals of Regional Science,1999.
[63]Klien, E., U. Einspanier, et al. An architecture for ontology-based discovery and retrieval of geographic information [C]. Conference on Geographic Information Science,2004.
[64]Kopecky, J., T. Vitvar, et al. SAWSDL:Semantic annotations for wsdl and xml schema [C]. IEEE Internet Computing,2007.
[65]Kuhn, W. Ontologies in support of activities in geographical space [J]. International Journal of Geographical Information Science,2001.
[66]kZen. ERGORR.http://code.google.com/p/buddata-ebxml-registry/[EB/OL], 2009.
[67]Lara, R., D. Roman, et al. A conceptual comparison of WSMO and OWL-S [R], WSMO Deliverable,2004.
[68]Lassila, O. and R. R. Swick. Resource description framework model and syntax specification [R]. World Wide Web Consortium W3C,1999.
[70]Lausen, H., A. Polleres, et al. Web Service Modeling Ontology (WSMO) [R]. WSMO Deliverable,2005.
[71]Lemmens, R., C. Granell, et al. Semantic and syntactic service descriptions at work in geo-service chaining [C]. Proceedings of the 9th AGILE International Conference on Geographic Information Science,2006.
[72]Lesage, N. OGC Cataloguing of ISO Metadata (CIM) Using the ebRIM profile of CS-W,2007.
[73]Li, L. and I. Horrocks. A Software Framework for Matchmaking Based on Semantic Web Technology. International Journal of Electronic Commerce,2004.
[74]Lieberman, J. OpenGIS Web Services Architecture:03-025,2003.
[75]Lloyd, J. W. Foundations of logic programming, Springer-Verlag New York, Inc. New York,1987.
[76]Lutz, M.. Ontology-based descriptions for semantic discovery and composition of geoprocessing services. Geoinformatica,2007.
[77]Martell, R. OGC catalogue services—ebRIM (ISO/TS 15000-3) profile of CSW [EB/OL]. https://portal. opengeospatial. org/files/index. php,2004.
[78]Martin, D., M. Burstein, et al. OWL-S:Semantic Markup for Web Services. W3C Member Submission,2004.
[79]Massimo Paoluccia, T. K., Terry R. Paynel, and Katia Sycaral. Importing the Semantic Web in UDDI [J]. LECTURE NOTES IN COMPUTER SCIENCE, 2002.
[80]Massimo Paoluccib, T. K., Terry R. Payne, and Katia Sycara. Semantic Matching of Web Services Capabilities [J]. LECTURE NOTES IN COMPUTER SCIENCE, 2002.
[81]Maue, P. An extensible semantic catalogue for geospatial web services [J]. International Journal of Spatial Data Infrastructures Research,2008 Vol.3 168-191.
[82]McIlraith, S. A. and T. C. H. Zeng (2001). Semantic web services [J]. IEEE Intelligent. Systems,2001.
[83]Momjian, B. PostgreSQL:introduction and concepts [M]. Addison-Wesley, 2001.
[84]Naveen Srinivasan, M. P., Katia Sycara. Adding OWL-S to UDDI, implementation and throughput [C]. In Proc.1st Intl. Workshop on Semantic Web Services and Web Process Composition,2004.
[85]Nebert, D. and A. Whiteside. OGC Catalogue Services Specification,2005.
[86]Nilsson, U. and J. Maluszynski. Logic, programming and Prolog [M]. Wiley New York,2005.
[87]Nathalie Steinmetz, et al. Simplifying the Web Service Discovery Process[C]. Workshop on Semantic Metadata Management and Applications,2008.
[88]OASIS. ebXML Registry Information Model Version 3.0 [EB/OL]. http://docs.oasis-open.org/regrep-rim/v3.0/,2005.
[89]Percivall, G. ISO 19119 and OGC Service architecture,2002.
[90]Roche, E. and Y. Schabes. Deterministic part-of-speech tagging with finite-state transducers. MIT Press Cambridge,1995.
[91]Roman, D., U. Keller, et al. Web service modeling ontology, IOS Press,2005.
[92]Roman, D., E. Klien, et al. SWING-A Semantic Web Services Framework for the Geospatial Domain. Workshop at the ISWC,2006.
[93]Schut, P. and A. Whiteside. OpenGIS Web Processing Service,2005.
[94]Senkler, K., U. Voges, et al. An ISO 19115/19119 Profile for OGC Catalogue Services CSW 2.0,2004.
[95]Singh, A. Digital change detection techniques using remotely sensed data [J]. International Journal of Remote Sensing,1989.
[96]Sirin, E., B. Parsia, et al. Pellet:A practical owl-dl reasoner. Web Semantics: Science. Services and Agents on the World Wide Web,2007.
[97]Srinivasan, N., M. Paolucci, et al. An Efficient Algorithm for OWL-S Based Semantic Search in UDDI [J]. Lecture Notes in Computer Science,2005.
[98]Tsou, M. H. An operational metadata framework for searching, indexing, and retrieving distributed geographic information services on the Internet [C]. Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Geographic Information Science,2002.
[99]Tsou, M. H. and B. P. Buttenfield. A dynamic architecture for distributing geographic information services [J]. Transactions in GIS,2002.
[100]Ullman, J. D. Principles of database systems [M].WH Freeman & Co. New York, NY, USA,1983.
[101]Uschold, M. and M. Gruninger. Ontologies:Principles, methods and applications [J]. Knowledge Engineering Review,1996.
[102]Visser, U., H. Stuckenschmidt, et al. Ontologies for geographic information processing [J]. Computers and Geosciences,2002.
[103]Vretanos, P. A. Filter Encoding Implementation Specification, OGC 04-095, Version:1.1.0,2005.
[104]Yao, Y., S. Su, et al. Service Matching Based on Semantic Descriptions [J]. Lecture Notes in Computer Science,2006.
[105]Yue, P., L. Di, et al. Semantic Augmentations for Geospatial Catalogue Service [C]. Proceedings of the 2006 IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium,2006.
[106]Zaremba, M., Moran, M., Haselwanter, T. WSMX-Web Service Execution Environment [EB/OL]. http://www.wsmo.org/TR/d13/d13.4/v0.2/,2005.
[107]王凌云,李琦等.Web Service与地理信息互操作.测绘科学,2004,29：38-41.
[108]包世泰,朱长青.地理数据共享与互操作技术.测绘工程,2000,9：32-36.
[109]安杨.基于本体的网络地理服务中的关键问题研究[D].武汉大学博士学位论文,2005.
[110]安杨,边馥苓等.基于Ontology的网络地理服务描述与发现.武汉大学学报(信息科学版),2004,29(12)：1063-1066.
[111]李宏伟.基于Ontology的地理信息服务研究[D].解放军信息工程大学博士学位论文,2007.
[112]李德仁.面向服务的数字城市共享平台框架的设计与实现[J].武汉大学学报(信息科学版),2008.
[113]李德仁.我国对地观测卫星的意义及其应用[N].中国测绘报,2008.
[114]杜清运.空间信息的语言学特征及其自动理解机制研究[D].武汉大学博士学位论文,2001.
[115]周成虎,欧阳等.我国遥感数据的集成与共享研究[J].中国工程科学,2008,10：51-55.
[116]徐宝祥,刘春艳,等.两种典型语义Web服务方法的比较研究[J].(2006)
[117]柴胜.空间资源中信息语义注册与检索相关技术研究[D].吉林大学博士学位论文,2008.
[118]党安荣,王晓栋等.ERDAS IMAGINE遥感图像处理方法[M].清华大学出版社,2002.
[119]崔巍,李德仁.基于本体与LDAP的空间信息网格资源管理[J].武汉大学学报信息科学版,2005.
[120]崔巍,蒋天发等.用数据挖掘和本体实现空间信息系统语义互操作[J].武汉理工大学学报(交通科学与工程版),2004,28：118-121.
[121]郭建宁.促进国家对地观测体系顺利发展的思考.中国工程科学,2006,8：47-53.
[122]乐鹏.语义支持的空间信息智能服务关键技术研究[D].武汉大学博士学位论文,2007.
[123]刘鹏.基于本体的GridGIS服务发现框架研究[J].地理信息世界,2007.
[124]张登荣,俞乐等.基于OGC WPS的Web环境遥感图像处理技术研究[J].浙江大学学报(工学版),2008,42：1184-1188.
[125]张路.基于多元统计分析的遥感影像变化检测方法研究[D].武汉大学博士学位论文,2004.
[126]汤国安.遥感数字图像处理.科学出版社,2004.
[127]郑文锋.面向服务的空间数据共享[D].成都理工大学博士论文,2008.
[128]黄茂军,杜清运等.地理本体空间特征的形式化表达机制研究.武汉大学学报(信息科学版),2005,30：337-340.
[129]龚健雅,高文秀.地理信息共享与互操作技术及标准.地理信息世界,2006,4：18-27.
[130]江泳,方裕.基于Web Service的空间数据共享平台.地理与地理信息科学,2004,Vol.20,No.5
[131]孙敏,陈秀万,张飞舟.地理信息本体论.地理与地理信息科学,2004,Vol.20，No.3
[132]周新忠.面向水利地理空间元数据研制与应用的关键技术研究[D],武汉大学博士论文,2006.
[133]陈丁剑.基于语义的Web服务发现和组合技术研究[D],西北工业大学博士论文,2006.
[2]Akkiraju, R., R. Goodwin, et al. A Method for Semantically Enhancing the Service Discovery Capabilities of UDDI [C]. Proceedings of IJCAI-03 Workshop on Information Integration on the Web,2003.
[3]Alonso, G., F. Casati, et al. Web services:concepts, architectures and applications [M], Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany, October 2003.
[4]Baader, F., D. Calvanese, et al. The Description Logic Handbook [M]. Cambridge University Press New York,2007.
[5]Battle, S., A. Bernstein, et al. Semantic web services framework (SWSF). W3C Member Submission,2005.
[6]Bellwood, T., L. Clement, et al. UDDI Version 3.0. UDDI Spec Technical Committee,2004.
[7]Berners-Lee, T., J. Hendler, et al. The semantic web [J]. Scientific American, 2001,284:28-37.
[8]Bishop, B. and F. Fischer. IRIS-Integrated Rule Inference System [C]. The 5th European Semantic Web Conference,2008.
[9]Bishr, Y. Overcoming the semantic and other barriers to GIS interoperability [J]. International Journal of Geographical Information Science,1998,12 (4): 299-314.
[10]Bruijn, J., C. Bussler, et al. Web Service Modeling Ontology (WSMO), W3C Member Submission,2005.
[11]Ceri, S., G. Gottlob, et al. What You Always Wanted to Know About Datalog (And Never Dared to Ask). IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering,1989,1 (1):146-166.
[12]Chao, K. M., M. Younas, et al. Fuzzy matchmaking for Web services. Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Advanced Information Networking and Applications,2005,721-726.
[13]Chinnici, R., R. Mordani, et al. The Java API for XML Web Services (JAX-WS). Sun Microsystems, Inc,2005.
[14]Christensen, E., F. Curbera, et al. Web services description language 2.0. W3C Candidate Recommendation,2006.
[15]Colgrave, J., R. Akkiraju, et al. External Matching in UDDI [C]. IEEE International Conference on Web Services,2004.
[16]Comite, F. G. D. Content Standard for Digital Geospatial Metadata [S]. Federal. Geographic Data Committee,1998.
[17]Danko, D., L. Reich, et al. ISO 19115 Geographic Information-Metadata [S]. ISO/TC 211,2000.
[18]De Bruijn, J., R. Lara, et al. OWL DL vs. OWL Flight:Conceptual modeling and reasoning for the semantic web [C]. International World Wide Web Conference, 2005,623-632.
[19]de Bruijn, J., H. Lausen, et al. The web service modeling language WSML. WSML Working Draft,2005.
[20]Di, L., A. Chen, et al. The integration of Grid technology with OGC Web Services (OWS) in NWGISS for NASA EOS Data. Proceedings of the. Eighth Global Grid Forum,2003.
[21]Di, L., B. Schlesinger, et al. US FGDC Content Standard for Digital Geospatial Metadata:Extensions for Remote Sensing Metadata [C]. International Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing,2000,33:78-81.
[22]Dogac, A., Y. Kabak, et al. Enriching ebXML registries with OWL ontologies for efficient service discovery [C].14th International Work Shop on Research Issues on Data Engineering,2004.
[23]Dogac, A., Y. Kabak, et al. Enhancing ebXML Registries to Make them OWL Aware [J]. Distributed and Parallel Databases,2005.
[24]Dogac, A., G. B. Laleci, et al. Exploiting ebXML registry semantic constructs for handling archetype metadata in healthcare informatics[J]. International Journal of Metadata, Semantics and Ontologies,2006.
[25]Duchesne P., M. P., Schade S. Semantic annotations in OGC standards. http://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=31102,2008.
[26]Egenhofer, M. J. Toward the semantic geospatial web [C]. Proceedings of the 10th ACM international symposium on Advances in geographic information systems,2002.
[27]Enderton, H. B. A mathematical introduction to logic [M]. Academic press, New York,1972.
[28]FAO. Geonetwork Opensource. http://geonetwork-opensource.org/,2009.
[29]Fellbaum, C. WordNet:An electronic lexical database [M]. MIT press Cambridge, MA,1998.
[30]Fensel, D. and C. Bussler. The web service modeling framework WSMF [J], Electronic Commerce Research and Applications,2002,1:113-137.
[31]Fensel, D., F. Van Harmelen, et al. OIL:An ontology infrastructure for the semantic web [J]. IEEE Intelligent Systems,2001,16 (2):38-45.
[32]Fernandez, M., A. Gomez-Perez, et al. Methontology:From ontological art towards ontological engineering. Spring Symposium Series on Ontological Engineering,1997.
[33]Fitzner, D. and J. Hoffmann. Functional Description of Geoprocessing Services as Conjunctive Queries [C]. Proceedings of the Geographic Information Science, 2007.
[34]Fonseca, F. T. and M. J. Egenhofer. Ontology-driven geographic information systems [M]. ACM New York,1999,14-19.
[35]Fortaleza, C. E. and R. J. Rio de Janeiro. Automatic Discovery and Composition of OGC Web Services.2008
[36]FranciscoCubera, P. B. Understanding WSDL in a UDDI registry [EB/OL]. http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/cn/webservices/ws-uwsdl/part1/index.html, 2001.
[37]Fuger, S., F. Najmi, et al. ebxml registry information model version 3.0. OASISTechnical report [EB/OL]. http://docs. oasis-open. org/regrep-rim/v3.0, 2005.
[38]Gonzalez-Castillo, J., D. Trastour, et al. Description Logics for Matchmaking of Services [R]. HP LABORATORIES TECHNICAL REPORT,2001.
[39]Grosof, B. N., I. Horrocks, et al. Description logic programs:Combining logic programs with description logic [C]. Proceedings of the 12th international conference on World Wide Web,2003.
[40]Gruber, T. R. A translation approach to portable ontology specifications [J]. Knowledge Acquisition,6(2):199-221,1993.
[41]Gruber, T. R. Toward principles for the design of ontologies used for knowledge sharing [J]. International Journal Human-Computer Studies,1995.
[42]Gruninger, M. and M. S. Fox. Methodology for the Design and Evaluation of Ontologies [C]. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Basic Ontological Issues in Knowledge Sharing,1995.
[43]Guarino, N. Formal Ontology in Information Systems [C]. Proceedings of FOIS'98,1998.
[44]Hilbring, D. and T. Uslander. Catalogue Services Enabling Syntactical and Semantic Interoperability in Environmental Risk Management Architectures [C]. Shaker Verlag, Aachen, Proceedings of 20th International Conference on Informatics for Environmental Protection:39-46,2006.
[45]Holsapple, C. W. and K. D. Joshi. A collaborative approach to ontology design. Communications of the ACM,2002.
[46]IANA. http://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/[EB/OL],2007.
[47]O. M. G. Meta object facility (MOF) specification [R] v1.4,2002
[48]ISO/TS 19129. Geographic information--Imagery and gridded data [S],2000.
[49]ISO/PS 19124. Geographic Information--Imagery and gridded data components [S],2000.
[50]ISO 19123. Geographic information--Schema for coverage geometry and functions [S],2005.
[51]ISO 19109. Geographic information -- Rules for application schema [S],2005.
[52]ISO 19115-2 Geographic information--Metadata--Part 2:Extensions for imagery and gridded data [S],2009.
[53]John.R.Jensen. Introductory Digital Image Processing:A Remote Sensing Perspective [M], Third Edition,2007.
[55]Keller, U., R. Lara, et al. Automatic location of services [C]. In Proceedings of the 2nd European Semantic Web Symposium,2005.
[56]Keller, U., R. Lara, et al. WSMO Web Service Discovery [R]. WSMO Deliverable,2004.
[57]Keller, U., H. Lausen, et al. On the semantics of functional descriptions of web services [J]. Lecture Notes in Computer Science,2006.
[58]Kerrigan, M., A. Mocan, et al. The web service modeling toolkit-an integrated development environment for semantic web services [J]. Lecture Notes in Computer Science,2007.
[59]Kietz, J. U., A. Maedche, et al. A method for semi-automatic ontology acquisition from a corporate intranet [C]. Workshop "Ontologies and text",2000.
[60]Kifer, M., G. Lausen, et al. Logical foundations of object-oriented and frame-based languages[J]. Journal of the ACM,1995.
[61]Kim, C. Implementing the ebXML Registry/Repository [J]. XML Journal,2000.
[62]Kim, T. J. Metadata for geo-spatial data sharing:A comparative analysis [J]. The Annals of Regional Science,1999.
[63]Klien, E., U. Einspanier, et al. An architecture for ontology-based discovery and retrieval of geographic information [C]. Conference on Geographic Information Science,2004.
[64]Kopecky, J., T. Vitvar, et al. SAWSDL:Semantic annotations for wsdl and xml schema [C]. IEEE Internet Computing,2007.
[65]Kuhn, W. Ontologies in support of activities in geographical space [J]. International Journal of Geographical Information Science,2001.
[66]kZen. ERGORR.http://code.google.com/p/buddata-ebxml-registry/[EB/OL], 2009.
[67]Lara, R., D. Roman, et al. A conceptual comparison of WSMO and OWL-S [R], WSMO Deliverable,2004.
[68]Lassila, O. and R. R. Swick. Resource description framework model and syntax specification [R]. World Wide Web Consortium W3C,1999.
[70]Lausen, H., A. Polleres, et al. Web Service Modeling Ontology (WSMO) [R]. WSMO Deliverable,2005.
[71]Lemmens, R., C. Granell, et al. Semantic and syntactic service descriptions at work in geo-service chaining [C]. Proceedings of the 9th AGILE International Conference on Geographic Information Science,2006.
[72]Lesage, N. OGC Cataloguing of ISO Metadata (CIM) Using the ebRIM profile of CS-W,2007.
[73]Li, L. and I. Horrocks. A Software Framework for Matchmaking Based on Semantic Web Technology. International Journal of Electronic Commerce,2004.
[74]Lieberman, J. OpenGIS Web Services Architecture:03-025,2003.
[75]Lloyd, J. W. Foundations of logic programming, Springer-Verlag New York, Inc. New York,1987.
[76]Lutz, M.. Ontology-based descriptions for semantic discovery and composition of geoprocessing services. Geoinformatica,2007.
[77]Martell, R. OGC catalogue services—ebRIM (ISO/TS 15000-3) profile of CSW [EB/OL]. https://portal. opengeospatial. org/files/index. php,2004.
[78]Martin, D., M. Burstein, et al. OWL-S:Semantic Markup for Web Services. W3C Member Submission,2004.
[79]Massimo Paoluccia, T. K., Terry R. Paynel, and Katia Sycaral. Importing the Semantic Web in UDDI [J]. LECTURE NOTES IN COMPUTER SCIENCE, 2002.
[80]Massimo Paoluccib, T. K., Terry R. Payne, and Katia Sycara. Semantic Matching of Web Services Capabilities [J]. LECTURE NOTES IN COMPUTER SCIENCE, 2002.
[81]Maue, P. An extensible semantic catalogue for geospatial web services [J]. International Journal of Spatial Data Infrastructures Research,2008 Vol.3 168-191.
[82]McIlraith, S. A. and T. C. H. Zeng (2001). Semantic web services [J]. IEEE Intelligent. Systems,2001.
[83]Momjian, B. PostgreSQL:introduction and concepts [M]. Addison-Wesley, 2001.
[84]Naveen Srinivasan, M. P., Katia Sycara. Adding OWL-S to UDDI, implementation and throughput [C]. In Proc.1st Intl. Workshop on Semantic Web Services and Web Process Composition,2004.
[85]Nebert, D. and A. Whiteside. OGC Catalogue Services Specification,2005.
[86]Nilsson, U. and J. Maluszynski. Logic, programming and Prolog [M]. Wiley New York,2005.
[87]Nathalie Steinmetz, et al. Simplifying the Web Service Discovery Process[C]. Workshop on Semantic Metadata Management and Applications,2008.
[88]OASIS. ebXML Registry Information Model Version 3.0 [EB/OL]. http://docs.oasis-open.org/regrep-rim/v3.0/,2005.
[89]Percivall, G. ISO 19119 and OGC Service architecture,2002.
[90]Roche, E. and Y. Schabes. Deterministic part-of-speech tagging with finite-state transducers. MIT Press Cambridge,1995.
[91]Roman, D., U. Keller, et al. Web service modeling ontology, IOS Press,2005.
[92]Roman, D., E. Klien, et al. SWING-A Semantic Web Services Framework for the Geospatial Domain. Workshop at the ISWC,2006.
[93]Schut, P. and A. Whiteside. OpenGIS Web Processing Service,2005.
[94]Senkler, K., U. Voges, et al. An ISO 19115/19119 Profile for OGC Catalogue Services CSW 2.0,2004.
[95]Singh, A. Digital change detection techniques using remotely sensed data [J]. International Journal of Remote Sensing,1989.
[96]Sirin, E., B. Parsia, et al. Pellet:A practical owl-dl reasoner. Web Semantics: Science. Services and Agents on the World Wide Web,2007.
[97]Srinivasan, N., M. Paolucci, et al. An Efficient Algorithm for OWL-S Based Semantic Search in UDDI [J]. Lecture Notes in Computer Science,2005.
[98]Tsou, M. H. An operational metadata framework for searching, indexing, and retrieving distributed geographic information services on the Internet [C]. Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Geographic Information Science,2002.
[99]Tsou, M. H. and B. P. Buttenfield. A dynamic architecture for distributing geographic information services [J]. Transactions in GIS,2002.
[100]Ullman, J. D. Principles of database systems [M].WH Freeman & Co. New York, NY, USA,1983.
[101]Uschold, M. and M. Gruninger. Ontologies:Principles, methods and applications [J]. Knowledge Engineering Review,1996.
[102]Visser, U., H. Stuckenschmidt, et al. Ontologies for geographic information processing [J]. Computers and Geosciences,2002.
[103]Vretanos, P. A. Filter Encoding Implementation Specification, OGC 04-095, Version:1.1.0,2005.
[104]Yao, Y., S. Su, et al. Service Matching Based on Semantic Descriptions [J]. Lecture Notes in Computer Science,2006.
[105]Yue, P., L. Di, et al. Semantic Augmentations for Geospatial Catalogue Service [C]. Proceedings of the 2006 IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium,2006.
[106]Zaremba, M., Moran, M., Haselwanter, T. WSMX-Web Service Execution Environment [EB/OL]. http://www.wsmo.org/TR/d13/d13.4/v0.2/,2005.
[107]王凌云,李琦等.Web Service与地理信息互操作.测绘科学,2004,29：38-41.
[108]包世泰,朱长青.地理数据共享与互操作技术.测绘工程,2000,9：32-36.
[109]安杨.基于本体的网络地理服务中的关键问题研究[D].武汉大学博士学位论文,2005.
[110]安杨,边馥苓等.基于Ontology的网络地理服务描述与发现.武汉大学学报(信息科学版),2004,29(12)：1063-1066.
[111]李宏伟.基于Ontology的地理信息服务研究[D].解放军信息工程大学博士学位论文,2007.
[112]李德仁.面向服务的数字城市共享平台框架的设计与实现[J].武汉大学学报(信息科学版),2008.
[113]李德仁.我国对地观测卫星的意义及其应用[N].中国测绘报,2008.
[114]杜清运.空间信息的语言学特征及其自动理解机制研究[D].武汉大学博士学位论文,2001.
[115]周成虎,欧阳等.我国遥感数据的集成与共享研究[J].中国工程科学,2008,10：51-55.
[116]徐宝祥,刘春艳,等.两种典型语义Web服务方法的比较研究[J].(2006)
[117]柴胜.空间资源中信息语义注册与检索相关技术研究[D].吉林大学博士学位论文,2008.
[118]党安荣,王晓栋等.ERDAS IMAGINE遥感图像处理方法[M].清华大学出版社,2002.
[119]崔巍,李德仁.基于本体与LDAP的空间信息网格资源管理[J].武汉大学学报信息科学版,2005.
[120]崔巍,蒋天发等.用数据挖掘和本体实现空间信息系统语义互操作[J].武汉理工大学学报(交通科学与工程版),2004,28：118-121.
[121]郭建宁.促进国家对地观测体系顺利发展的思考.中国工程科学,2006,8：47-53.
[122]乐鹏.语义支持的空间信息智能服务关键技术研究[D].武汉大学博士学位论文,2007.
[123]刘鹏.基于本体的GridGIS服务发现框架研究[J].地理信息世界,2007.
[124]张登荣,俞乐等.基于OGC WPS的Web环境遥感图像处理技术研究[J].浙江大学学报(工学版),2008,42：1184-1188.
[125]张路.基于多元统计分析的遥感影像变化检测方法研究[D].武汉大学博士学位论文,2004.
[126]汤国安.遥感数字图像处理.科学出版社,2004.
[127]郑文锋.面向服务的空间数据共享[D].成都理工大学博士论文,2008.
[128]黄茂军,杜清运等.地理本体空间特征的形式化表达机制研究.武汉大学学报(信息科学版),2005,30：337-340.
[129]龚健雅,高文秀.地理信息共享与互操作技术及标准.地理信息世界,2006,4：18-27.
[130]江泳,方裕.基于Web Service的空间数据共享平台.地理与地理信息科学,2004,Vol.20,No.5
[131]孙敏,陈秀万,张飞舟.地理信息本体论.地理与地理信息科学,2004,Vol.20，No.3
[132]周新忠.面向水利地理空间元数据研制与应用的关键技术研究[D],武汉大学博士论文,2006.
[133]陈丁剑.基于语义的Web服务发现和组合技术研究[D],西北工业大学博士论文,2006.
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |