Introducing web service accessibility assessment techniques through a unified quality of service context

Service Oriented Computing and Applications

Volumn 8, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 159-174

  Giakoumis, Dimitris ^a,b   Votis, Konstantinos ^a   Tzovaras, Dimitrios ^a  

^a INFORMATICS AND TELEMATICS INSTITUTE   (Greece)

^b ARISTOTLE UNIVERSITY OF THESSALONIKI   (Greece)

Author keywords

Accessibility; Assessment tool; QoS attributes; Quality of service; Web services

Indexed keywords

QUALITY OF SERVICE; WEB SERVICES; WEBSITES;

ACCESSIBILITY; ACCESSIBILITY GUIDELINES; ASSESSMENT TECHNIQUE; ASSESSMENT TOOL; AUTOMATIC ASSESSMENT; END-USER APPLICATIONS; PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES; QOS ATTRIBUTES;

TELECOMMUNICATION SERVICES;

EID: 84901232271     PISSN: 18632386     EISSN: 18632394     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11761-013-0135-5     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Abascal J, Arrue M, Fajardo I, Garay N, Toms J (2004) The use of guidelines to automatically verify web accessibility. Univers Access Inf Soc 3: 71-79.
2. Alrifai M, Risse T (2009) Combining global optimization with local selection for efficient qos-aware service composition. In: Proceedings of the 18th international conference on world wide web, WWW '09. ACM, New York, pp 881-890.
3. Ardagna D, Pernici B (2006) Global and local qos guarantee in web service selection. In: Bussler C, Haller A (eds) Business process management workshops, lecture notes in computer science, vol 3812. Springer, Berlin, pp 32-46.
4. Burkard R, Dell'Amico M, Martello S (2009) Assignment problems. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, Philadelphia.
5. Dietze S, Gugliotta A, Domingue J, Yu H, Mrissa M (2010) An automated approach to semantic web services mediation. Serv Oriented Comput Appl 4: 261-275.
6. D'Mello DA, Ananthanarayana VS (2010) Dynamic selection mechanism for quality of service aware web services. Enterp Inf Syst 4: 23-60.
7. Giakoumis D, Votis K, Tzovaras D, Likothanassis S, Hassapis, G (2010) Introducing accessibility in the web services domain. In: Computer science and information technology (ICCSIT), 2010 3rd IEEE International Conference on, vol. 2, pp 18-22.
8. Internet Engineering Task Force rfc 2119. http://www. ietf. org/rfc/rfc2119. txt.
9. Kehagias DD, Giannoutakis KM, Gravvanis GA, Tzovaras D (2012) An ontology-based mechanism for automatic categorization of web services. Concurr Comput Pract Exper 24(3): 214-236.
10. Lazar J, Dudley-Sponaugle A, Greenidge KD (2004) Improving web accessibility: a study of webmaster perceptions. Comput Hum Behav 20(2): 269-288.
11. Liu Y, Ngu AH, Zeng LZ (2004) Qos computation and policing in dynamic web service selection. In: Proceedings of the 13th international World Wide Web conference on Alternate track papers & posters, WWW Alt. '04, pp 66-73. ACM, New York.
12. Martin D, Paolucci M, McIlraith S, Burstein M, McDermott D, McGuinness D, Parsia B, Payne T, Sabou M, Solanki M, Srinivasan N, Sycara K (2005) Bringing semantics to web services: the owl-s approach. In: Cardoso J, Sheth A (eds) Semantic web services and web process composition, lecture notes in computer science, vol 3387. Springer, Berlin, pp 26-42.
13. Ma H, Schewe KD, Thalheim B, Wang Q: A formal model for the interoperability of service clouds. Service Oriented Computing and Applications pp 1-17.
14. Menasce D (2002) Qos issues in web services. IEEE Internet Comput 6(6): 72-75.
15. Mobedpour D, Ding C: User-centered design of a qos-based web service selection system. Service Oriented Computing and Applications pp 1-11.
16. OWL-S: Semantic markup for web services. http://www. w3. org/Submission/OWL-S/.
17. Pedersen T, Patwardhan S, Michelizzi J (2004) Wordnet: similarity: measuring the relatedness of concepts. Demonstration papers at HLT-NAACL 2004, HLT-NAACL-demonstrations '04. Association for Computational Linguistics, Stroudsburg, PA, USA, pp 38-41.
18. Roman D, Keller U, Lausen H, de Bruijn J, Lara R, Stollberg M, Polleres A, Feier C, Bussler C, Fensel D (2005) Web service modeling ontology. Appl Ontol 1(1): 77-106.
19. Sierkowski B (2002) Achieving web accessibility. In: Proceedings of the 30th annual ACM SIGUCCS conference on user services, SIGUCCS '02. ACM, New York, pp 288-291.
20. Simple Object Access Protocol (SOAP) W3C Specifications. http://www. w3. org/TR/soap/.
21. Soydan Bilgin A, Singh M (2004) A daml-based repository for qos-aware semantic web service selection. In: Web Services, 2004. Proceedings IEEE International Conference on, pp 368-375.
22. Thatcher J, Waddell C (2003) Constructing accessible websites. APress L. P.
23. W3C Evaluation and Report Language (EARL) Schema. http://www. w3. org/TR/EARL10-Schema/.
24. W3C Web Accessibility Initiative, Conformance Evaluation of Web Sites for Accessibility. http://www. w3. org/WAI/eval/conformance. html.
25. Web Application Description Language (WADL). http://www. w3. org/Submission/wadl/.
26. Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (w3c wcag 2. 0). http://www. w3. org/TR/WCAG/.
27. Web Services Description Language (WSDL). http://www. w3. org/TR/wsdl/.
28. Website Accessibility Conformance Evaluation Methodology 1. 0, W3C Working Draft. http://www. w3. org/TR/WCAG-EM/.
29. Yu T, Lin KJ (2005) Service selection algorithms for composing complex services with multiple qos constraints vol. 3826. In: Benatallah B, Casati F, Traverso P (eds) Service-oriented computing-ICSOC 2005, lecture notes in computer science. Springer, Berlin, pp 130-143.
30. Yu T, Lin KJ (2005) Service selection algorithms for web services with end-to-end qos constraints. Inf Syst E-Bus Manag 3: 103-126.
31. Zeng L, Benatallah B, Ngu A, Dumas M, Kalagnanam J, Chang H (2004) Qos-aware middleware for web services composition. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 30(5): 311-327.
32. Zeng L, Benatallah B, Dumas M, Kalagnanam J, Sheng QZ (2003) Quality-driven web services composition. 12th international conference on the World Wide Web (WWW). ACM Press, Budapest, pp 411-421.