http://www.bibsonomy.org/burst/tag/open-sourceBibSonomy BuRST Feed for /tag/open-source2008-07-27T03:43:47+02:00SpringerLink - Zeitschriftenbeitraghttp://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/27646e1bec3b08807da9191a5bb384b71/mschubermschuber2008-07-22T21:03:42+02:00open-source structure hierarchy organisation <span style="color:#555555;">Kevin <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Crowston">Crowston</a> and James <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Howison">Howison</a> </span><em>Knowledge, Technology, and Policy</em><em>18(4):65--85</em><em>#dec#2006. </em>Tue Jul 22 21:03:42 CEST 2008Knowledge, Technology, and Policy#dec#465--85Hierarchy and centralization in free and open source software team communications182006open-source structure hierarchy organisation Abstract&nbsp;&nbsp;Free/Libre Open Source Software (FLOSS) development teams provide an interesting and convenient setting for studying distributed work. We begin by answering perhaps the most basic question: what is the social structure of these teams? We conducted socialnetwork analyses of bug-fixing interactions from three repositories: Sourceforge, GNU Savannah and Apache Bugzilla. We findthat some OSS teams are highly centralized, but contrary to expectation, others are not. Projects are mostly quite hierarchicalon four measures of hierarchy, consistent with past research but contrary to the naive image of these projects. Furthermore,we find that the level of centralization is negatively correlated with project size, suggesting that larger projects becomemore modular, or possibly that becoming more modular is a key to growth. The paper makes a further methodological contributionby identifying appropriate analysis approaches for interaction data. We conclude by sketching directions for future research.presents a quantitive analysis of open source software developershttp://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2dd476f26fd8a67e14ad9078abfeb74a2/mschubermschuber2008-06-04T11:18:43+02:00analysis application networks open-source software <span style="color:#555555;">Jin <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Xu">Xu</a> and Yongqin <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Gao">Gao</a> and Scott <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Christley">Christley</a> and Gregory <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Madey">Madey</a> </span><em>HICSS '05: Proceedings of the Proceedings of the 38th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS'05) - Track 7, </em><em>page198. </em><em>Washington, DC, USA, </em><em>IEEE Computer Society, </em>(<em>2005</em>)Wed Jun 04 11:18:43 CEST 2008Washington, DC, USAHICSS '05: Proceedings of the Proceedings of the 38th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS'05) - Track 7198A Topological Analysis of the Open Source Software Development Community2005analysis application networks open-source software The fast growth of OSS has increased the interest in studying the composition of the OSS community and its collaboration mechanisms. Moreover, the success of a project may be related to the underlying social structure of the OSS development community. In this paper, we perform a quantitative analysis of Open Source Software developers by studying the entire development community at SourceForge [26]. Statistics and social network properties are explored to find collaborations and the effects of different members in the OSS development community. Small world phenomenon and scale free behaviors are found in the SourceForge development network. These topological properties may potentially explain the success and efficiency of OSS development practices. We also infer from our analysis that weakly associated but contributing co-developers and active users may be an important factor in OSS development.Two case studies of open source software developmenthttp://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/26abef027845ec3a3f9043d3fe3c46aa6/neilernstneilernst2007-11-23T21:03:47+01:00software open-source empirical <span style="color:#555555;">Audris <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Mockus">Mockus</a> and Roy T. <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Fielding">Fielding</a> and James <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Herbsleb">Herbsleb</a> </span><em>ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol.</em><em>11(3):309--346</em>(<em>2002</em>)Fri Nov 23 21:03:47 CET 2007New York, NY, USAACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol.3309--346Two case studies of open source software development: Apache and Mozilla112002software open-source empirical According to its proponents, open source style software development has the capacity to compete successfully, and perhaps in many cases displace, traditional commercial development methods. In order to begin investigating such claims, we examine data from two major open source projects, the Apache web server and the Mozilla browser. By using email archives of source code change history and problem reports we quantify aspects of developer participation, core team size, code ownership, productivity, defect density, and problem resolution intervals for these OSS projects. We develop several hypotheses by comparing the Apache project with several commercial projects. We then test and refine several of these hypotheses, based on an analysis of Mozilla data. We conclude with thoughts about the prospects for high-performance commercial/open source process hybrids.http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/21af8b1b1a523b0e77c67cc31cb8f554a/avivagabrielavivagabriel2007-11-20T18:31:27+01:00knowledge-sharing internet-based teams sharing CoPs networking commonalities KOL creative-commons shared self-archiving opensource creativecommons social open-source civic CC identify social-capital knowledge-management IT information-sciences social-software collaboration web-based social-science technology CoP socialnetworking sociology share KOLs communications OA infotech essays social-sciences socialnetworks computer-science experts MIS networks mutual trust sociotechnical AI identification multidisciplinary relational capital expert-mapper knowledge management IR socialware open-archives responsibility community-building heterogeneous open_archives commonality socialcapital leaders culture info collaborate information-science common KM economics tech communities internet openaccess online book acceptance community open-access information alignment <span style="color:#555555;">Marleen <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Huysman">Huysman</a> and Volker <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Wulf">Wulf</a> </span><em>MIT Press, </em><em>Cambridge, MA, </em>(<em>2004</em>)Tue Nov 20 18:31:27 CET 2007Cambridge, MASocial Capital and Information Technology2004knowledge-sharing internet-based teams sharing CoPs networking commonalities KOL creative-commons shared self-archiving opensource creativecommons social open-source civic CC identify social-capital knowledge-management IT information-sciences social-software collaboration web-based social-science technology CoP socialnetworking sociology share KOLs communications OA infotech essays social-sciences socialnetworks computer-science experts MIS networks mutual trust sociotechnical AI identification multidisciplinary relational capital expert-mapper knowledge management IR socialware open-archives responsibility community-building heterogeneous open_archives commonality socialcapital leaders culture info collaborate information-science common KM economics tech communities internet openaccess online book acceptance community open-access information alignment The concept of social capital, or the value that can be derived from social ties created by goodwill, mutual support, shared language, common beliefs, and a sense of mutual obligation, has been applied to a number of fields, from sociology to management. It is only lately, however, that researchers in information technology and knowledge management have begun to explore the idea of social capital in relation to their fields. This collection of thirteen essays by computer scientists, sociologists, communication specialists, economists, and others presents a multidisciplinary look at this particular intersection of information technology and social science and the need to adopt a sociotechnical perspective. For the most part the contributors take a positive view of the interplay of social capital, knowledge sharing, and community building. Some essays look at specific instances, including the on-line and face-to-face relationships of a community of athletes, the building of social capital among Iranian NGOs, and the Internet-based communities created by the open-source movement, while others discuss more general ideas of civic and personal communities. The last four essays examine computer applications that augment social capital, including topic- and member-centered communications spaces such as the Expert Finder and the Loops system and virtual repositories of knowledge such as the Answer Garden and Pearls of Wisdom. Table of Content 1 Social Capital and Information Technology: Current Debates and Research Marleen Huysman and Volker Wulf 1 I Social Capital in Civic Engagement 17 2 Trust, Acceptance, and Alignment: The Role of IT in Redirecting a Community Anna-Liisa Syrjänen and Kari Kuutti 21 3 The Effects of Dispersed Virtual Communities on Face-to-Face Social Capital Anita Blanchard 53 4 Find What Binds: Building Social Capital in an Iranian NGO Community System Markus Rohde 75 5 How Does the Internet Affect Social Capital? Anabel Quan-Haase and Barry Wellman 113http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2894cbdbca47e32a14790e88392af41a3/neilernstneilernst2007-10-22T17:56:40+02:00open-source linux software <span style="color:#555555;">Federico <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Iannacci">Iannacci</a> </span><em>Emergence: Complexity and Organization</em><em>7(2):21--31</em>(<em>2005</em>)Mon Oct 22 17:56:40 CEST 2007Emergence: Complexity and Organization221--31Coordination Processes in Open Source Software Development: The Linux Case Study72005open-source linux software Although open source projects have been subject to extensive study, their coordination processes are still poorly understood. Drawing on organization theory, this paper sets out to remedy this imbalance by showing that large-scale open source projects exhibit three main coordination mechanisms, namely standardization, loose coupling and partisan mutual adjustment. Implications in terms of electronically-mediated communications and networked interdependencies are discussed in the final sections where a new light is cast on the concept of structuring as a by-product of localized adjustments.http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2fcc5636878b630e7390ca4ce9dcb8e4d/sb3000sb30002007-10-01T21:00:45+02:00open-source <span style="color:#555555;">Jamie <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Dinkelacker">Dinkelacker</a> and Pankaj K. <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Garg">Garg</a> and Rob <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Miller">Miller</a> and Dean <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Nelson">Nelson</a> </span><em>ICSE '02: Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Software Engineering, </em><em>page177--184. </em><em>New York, NY, USA, </em><em>ACM Press, </em>(<em>2002</em>)Mon Oct 01 21:00:45 CEST 2007New York, NY, USAICSE '02: Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Software Engineering177--184Progressive Open Source2002open-source Amazon.de: Die Befreiung der Information. GNU, Linux und die Folgen: Bücher: André Spiegelhttp://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2ca9bf40ba73c13458bac90fd8fb95778/heinzwittenbrinkheinzwittenbrink2007-07-28T09:56:59+02:00open-source netzwissenschaft <span style="color:#555555;">Andr&#233; <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Spiegel">Spiegel</a> </span>(<em>2007</em>) <em>Komplett downloadbar . </em>Sat Jul 28 09:56:59 CEST 2007Komplett downloadbarDie Befreiung der Information. GNU, Linux und die Folgen2007open-source netzwissenschaft http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2290390167f71426da0a1de4998f4e57c/neilernstneilernst2007-06-10T04:22:41+02:00open-source evolution litmap <span style="color:#555555;">Michael W. <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Godfrey">Godfrey</a> and Qiang <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Tu">Tu</a> </span><em>International Conference on Software Maintenance, </em><em>page131--142. </em><em>San Jose, California, </em><em>IEEE Computer Society, </em><em>October2000. </em>Sun Jun 10 04:22:41 CEST 2007San Jose, CaliforniaInternational Conference on Software MaintenanceOctober131--142Evolution in Open Source Software: A Case Study2000open-source evolution litmap Most studies of software evolution have been performed on systems developed within a single company using traditional management techniques. With the widespread availability of several large software systems that have been developed using an “open source” development approach, we now have a chance to examine these systems in detail, and see if their evolutionary narratives are significantly different from commercially developed systems. The paper summarizes our preliminary investigations into the evolution of the best known open source system: the Linux operating system kernel. Because Linux is large (over two million lines of code in the most recent version) and because its development model is not as tightly planned and managed as most industrial software processes, we had expected to find that Linux was growing more slowly as it got bigger and more complex. Instead, we have found that Linux has been growing at a super-linear rate for several years. The authors explore the evolution of the Linux kernel both at the system level and within the major subsystems, and they discuss why they think Linux continues to exhibit such strong growthhttp://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/26f315bcbe57a4aa92429c4647361c4a5/neilernstneilernst2007-05-27T01:13:40+02:00requirements open-source <span style="color:#555555;">Walt <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Scacchi">Scacchi</a> and Chris <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Jensen">Jensen</a> and John <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Noll">Noll</a> and Margaret <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Elliott">Elliott</a> </span><em>International conference on Open Source Systems, </em><em>1, </em><em>page49-63. </em><em>Genoa, Italy, </em>(<em>2005</em>)Sun May 27 01:13:40 CEST 2007Genoa, ItalyInternational conference on Open Source SystemsInternational Journal of Information Technology and Web Engineering (IJITWE)349-63Multi-Modal Modeling, Analysis and Validation of Open Source Software Requirements Processes12005requirements open-source Understanding the context, structure, activities, and content of software development processes found in practice has been and remains a challenging problem. In the world of free/open source software development (F/OSSD), discovering and understanding what processes are used in particular projects is important in determining how they are similar to or different from those advocated by the software engineering community. Prior studies however have revealed that the requirements processes in F/OSSD projects are different in a number of ways. In this article, we describe how a variety of modeling perspectives and techniques are used to elicit, analyze, and validate software requirements processes found in F/OSSD projects, with examples drawn from studies of the NetBeans.org project.http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/26349dedb81818e31d34d500476171a9a/jboy701jboy7012007-04-29T22:40:42+02:00semantic integration open-source ontology <span style="color:#555555;">Yannis <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Kalfoglou">Kalfoglou</a> and W. <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Marco Schorlemmer">Marco Schorlemmer</a> and Amit P. <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Sheth">Sheth</a> and Steffen <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Staab">Staab</a> and Michael <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Uschold">Uschold</a> (eds.). </span><em>volume04391ofDagstuhl Seminar Proceedings, </em><em>IBFI, Schloss Dagstuhl, Germany, </em>(<em>2005</em>)Sun Apr 29 22:40:42 CEST 2007Semantic Interoperability and IntegrationDagstuhl Seminar ProceedingsSemantic Interoperability and Integration043912005semantic integration open-source ontology Provides some insight into why companies may adopt open-source software.http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/28f8492f4944637550c420a193dca20a3/neilernstneilernst2007-04-13T20:53:49+02:00open-source economics <span style="color:#555555;">Dirk <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Riehle">Riehle</a> </span><em>IEEE Computer</em><em>40(4):25-32</em>(<em>2007</em>)Fri Apr 13 20:53:49 CEST 2007IEEE Computer425-32The Economic Motivation of Open Source Software: Stakeholder Perspectives402007open-source economics http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2365ba959d641f73926ff3046a38f16ba/neilernstneilernst2007-04-06T23:14:41+02:00software open-source <span style="color:#555555;">Greg <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Wilson">Wilson</a> </span><em>IEEE Software</em><em>16(1):23--25</em>(<em>1999</em>)Fri Apr 06 23:14:41 CEST 2007IEEE Software123--25Is the Open-Source Community Setting a Bad Example?161999software open-source My, how the world has changed. IBM is now backing Apache, Netscape has put an extraordinary amount of useful software out into the open, and vendors such as Metrowerks, Sybase and Oracle have released versions of their tools to run on a give-away operating system. It seems that the open-source movement-Linux, Perl, Apache, and their many cousins-has finally hit the big time. But my, how the world has stayed the same. EGGS (a derivative of the Free Software Foundation's GNU C++) is one of the few compilers around that has kept pace with the ANSI standard, but CVS, the open-source version control system, is 1O years behind equivalent commercial offerings. Linux is now more robust than some commercial varieties of Unix, but it's impossible to compare the reliability of open-source project management tools to that of Microsoft Project because the former don't existhttp://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2c35f7ef2ff4fe21a7d411360eb91b5ae/neilernstneilernst2006-12-31T18:56:17+01:00software open-source <span style="color:#555555;">Mark <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Aberdour">Aberdour</a> </span><em>IEEE Software</em><em>24(1):58-64</em><em>January/February2007. </em>Sun Dec 31 18:56:17 CET 2006IEEE SoftwareJanuary/February158-64Achieving Quality in Open Source Software242007software open-source The open source software community has published a substantial body of research on OSS quality. Focusing on this peer-reviewed body of work lets us draw conclusions from empirical data rather than rely on the large volume of evangelical opinion that has historically dominated this field. This body of published research has become much more critical and objective in its efforts to understand OSS development, and a consensus has emerged on the key components of high-quality OSS delivery. This article reviews this body of research and draws out lessons learned, investigating how the approaches used to deliver high-quality OSS differ from, and can be incorporated into, closed-source software development. http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2d4dc78d9972f9c00febfdd9fa3679c45/neilernstneilernst2006-10-27T19:22:08+02:00modeling open-source conceptual <span style="color:#555555;">Stefan <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Koch">Koch</a> and Stefan <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Strecker">Strecker</a> and Ulrich <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Frank">Frank</a> </span><em>International Conference on Open Source Systems, </em><em>Como, Italy, </em><em>Springer, </em><em>June2006. </em>Fri Oct 27 19:22:08 CEST 2006Como, ItalyInternational Conference on Open Source SystemsJuneConceptual Modelling as a New Entry in the Bazaar: The Open Model Approach2006modeling open-source conceptual 8--10The present contribution proposes to transfer the main principles of open source software development to a new context: conceptual modelling; an activity closely related to software development. The goal of the proposed “open model” approach is to collaboratively develop reference models for everyone to copy, use and refine in a public process. We briefly introduce conceptual modelling and reference models, discuss the cornerstones of an open modelling process, and propose a procedure for initiating, growing and sustaining an open model project. The paper concludes with a discussion of potential benefits and pitfalls.http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/21ee4ab2add2037542fd1b2fe224c887e/neilernstneilernst2006-10-03T21:47:25+02:00requirements open-source empirical <span style="color:#555555;">Barbara <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Paech">Paech</a> and Bernd <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Reuschenbach">Reuschenbach</a> </span><em>International Conference on Requirements Engineering, </em><em>page257--262. </em><em>Minneapolis, Minnesota, </em><em>IEEE, </em><em>September2006. </em>Tue Oct 03 21:47:25 CEST 2006Minneapolis, MinnesotaInternational Conference on Requirements EngineeringSeptember257--262Open source requirements engineering2006requirements open-source empirical 10--14http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2dd1595573c25988f6df6a4875df255fc/neilernstneilernst2006-09-25T23:20:40+02:00empirical could-read complexity open-source design <span style="color:#555555;">Alan <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/MacCormack">MacCormack</a> and John <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Rusnak">Rusnak</a> and Carliss Y. <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Baldwin">Baldwin</a> </span><em>Working Paper, </em><em>05-016. </em><em>Harvard Business School, </em>(<em>2005</em>)Mon Sep 25 23:20:40 CEST 200605-016Exploring the Structure of Complex Software Designs: An Empirical Study of Open Source and Proprietary CodeWorking Paper2005empirical could-read complexity open-source design This paper reports data from a study that seeks to characterize the differences in design structure between complex software products. In particular, we use Design Structure Matrices (DSMs) to map the dependencies between the elements of a design and define metrics that allow us to compare the structures of different designs. We first use these metrics to compare the architectures of two software products – the Linux operating system and the Mozilla web browser – that were developed via contrasting modes of organization: specifically, open source versus proprietary development. We then track the evolution of Mozilla, paying particular attention to a purposeful “re-design” effort that was undertaken with the intention of making the product more “modular.” We find significant differences in structure between Linux and the first version of Mozilla, suggesting that Linux had a more modular architecture. We also find that the redesign of Mozilla resulted in an architecture that was significantly more modular than that of its predecessor, and indeed, than that of Linux. Our results, while exploratory, are consistent with a view that different modes of organization are associated with designs that possess different structures. However, we also illustrate that purposeful managerial actions can have a large impact on structure. This latter result is important given recent moves to release proprietary software into the public domain. These moves are likely to fail unless the product possesses an architecture that facilitates participation. Our paper provides evidence that a tightly-coupled design can be adapted to meet this objective.http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/27a5b1d3e4ddb5904f74d6df749b85ed2/neilernstneilernst2006-09-20T06:09:15+02:00should-read open-source <span style="color:#555555;">Vijay K. <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Gurbani">Gurbani</a> and Anita <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Garvert">Garvert</a> and James D. <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Herbsleb">Herbsleb</a> </span><em>ICSE, </em><em>page472-481. </em><em>ACM, </em>(<em>2006</em>)Wed Sep 20 06:09:15 CEST 2006ICSEDBLP:conf/icse/2006472-481A case study of a corporate open source development model.2006should-read open-source sdasdahttp://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2d4ad400d07a3f8bc900b3dfd4bd2d4de/neilernstneilernst2006-09-19T02:52:41+02:00forking open-source <span style="color:#555555;">Rick <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Moen">Moen</a> </span><em>http://linuxmafia.com/faq/Licensing_and_Law/forking.html, </em><em>November1999. </em>Tue Sep 19 02:52:41 CEST 2006http://linuxmafia.com/faq/Licensing_and_Law/forking.htmlNovemberFear of Forking1999forking open-source WHY LINUX WON'T FORK And why being able to fork is still A Good Thing.[2]http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/227c5bd1547cb52bcb04884bd57ee3a92/neilernstneilernst2006-09-19T02:43:54+02:00open-source <span style="color:#555555;">Sigi <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Goode">Goode</a> </span><em>Information \&amp; Management</em><em>42(5):669--681</em><em>July2005. </em>Tue Sep 19 02:43:54 CEST 2006Information \& ManagementJuly5669--681Something for nothing: management rejection of open source software in Australia's top firms422005open-source Organisations have traditionally relied on commercial software products to support their operations. However, rising software costs and recent corporate failures have brought the provision and value of commercial software into question. Recently, open source software, as a relatively new development in the IS field, has risen in popularity as a possible panacea for these ills. If firms value low acquisition cost, ostensibly plentiful support, and source code access, why have not more firms adopted open source software? The lack of published empirical research in the area means this issue has been inadequately addressed.This paper examines why firms do not adopt open source software. This study surveyed 500 of Australia's top firms to see why managers rejected open source software. The study found that managers rejected open source software because they could not see that it had any relevance to their operations, perceived a lack of reliable ongoing technical support of it and also appeared to see substantial learning costs or had adopted other software that they believed to be incompatible with open source software.Not previously uploadedhttp://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/20f4215246e03fc01e0b36eb65f8ff7b3/neilernstneilernst2006-09-18T06:26:07+02:00bioinformatics semantic open-source <span style="color:#555555;">M. D. <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Wilkinson">Wilkinson</a> and M. <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Links">Links</a> </span><em>Brief Bioinform</em><em>3(4):331--341</em><em>December2002. </em>Mon Sep 18 06:26:07 CEST 2006BioMOBY Project, Plant Biotechnology Institute, National Research Council Canada, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan. mwilkinson@gene.pbi.nrc.caBrief BioinformDecember4331--341BioMOBY: an open source biological web services proposal.32002bioinformatics semantic open-source BioMOBY is an Open Source research project which aims to generate an architecture for the discovery and distribution of biological data through web services; data and services are decentralised, but the availability of these resources, and the instructions for interacting with them, are registered in a central location called MOBY Central. BioMOBY adds to the web services paradigm, as exemplified by Universal Data Discovery and Integration (UDDI), by having an object-driven registry query system with object and service ontologies. This allows users to traverse expansive and disparate data sets where each possible next step is presented based on the data object currently in-hand. Moreover, a path from the current data object to a desired final data object could be automatically discovered using the registry. Native BioMOBY objects are lightweight XML, and make up both the query and the response of a simple object access protocol (SOAP) transaction.