The software stability approach is required to balance the seemingly contradictory goals of stability over the software lifecycle with the need for adaptability, extensibility and interoperability. This workshop paper addresses the issue of how software stability can be achieved over time by outlining an approach to evolving General Business Patterns (GBPs) from the empirical data contained within legacy systems. GBPs are patterns of business objects that are (directionally) stable across contexts of use. The work explains, via a small worked example, how stability is achieved via a process of ‘sophistication’. The outcome of the process demonstrates how the balance that stability seeks can be achieved.

The workshop aimed at providing a forum to discuss the use of philosophical ontology in object-oriented information systems. Whilst ontology is now more widely used in computing circles – knowledge representation, system integration, legacy transformation, and the semantic web for example – initial attempts have been modest in their outcomes. This is because computing ontology to-date has been used primarily for (often competing) concept definitions: Pragmatically, ontologies have either been developed in an abstract sense (based on some authorative perspective), or people have taken materials at hand (data models and the like) and tried to glue them together. A sound basis on which to properly align different views on aspects of the world in order to work towards a consistent whole is missing. With this in mind, the workshop aimed to secure a measure of agreement on:

• What philosophical ontology is,
• How ontology can assist in software development,
• Key obstacles to the deployment of ontology, and
• Possible collaborative efforts among the participants.

Selection of participants was based on short position papers and/or previously demonstrated interest in related areas of activity.
The title of this report should be referenced as “Report from the ECOOP 2004 Workshop on Philosophy, Ontology, and Information Systems”.

With re-engineering of software systems becoming quite pronounced amongst organisations, a software stability approach is required to balance the seemingly contradictory goals of stability over the software lifecycle with the need for adaptability, extensibility and interoperability. This paper addresses the issue of how software stability can be achieved over time by outlining an approach to evolving General Business Patterns (GBPs) from the empirical data contained within legacy systems. GBPs are patterns of business objects that are (directionally) stable across contexts of use. The approach is rooted in developing patterns by extracting the business knowledge embedded in existing software systems. The process of developing this business knowledge is done via the careful use of ontology, which provides a way to reap the benefits of clear semantic expression. A worked example is presented to show how stability is achieved via a process of ‘interpretation’ and ‘sophistication’. The outcome of the process demonstrates how the balance that stability seeks can be achieved.

Several foundational ontologies have been developed recently. We examine two of these from the point of view of their quality in representing temporal changes, focusing on the example of roles. We discuss how these are modelled in two foundational ontologies: the Unified Foundational Ontology and the BORO foundational ontology. These exhibit two different approaches, endurantist and perdurantist respectively. We illustrate the differences using a running example in the university student domain, wherein one individual is not only a registered student but also, for part of this period, was elected the President of the Student Union. The metaphysical choices made by UFO and BORO lead to different representations of roles. Two key differences which affect the way roles are modelled are exemplified in this paper: (1) different criteria of identity and (2) differences in the way individual objects extend over time and possible worlds. These differences impact upon the quality of the models produced in terms of their respective explanatory power. The UFO model concentrates on the notion of validity in “all possible worlds” and is unable to accurately represent the way particulars are extended in time. The perdurantist approach is best able to describe temporal changes wherein roles are spatio-temporal extents of individuals.