ETSI TR 103 535 V1.1.1 (2019-10)

TECHNICAL REPORT
SmartM2M;
Guidelines for using semantic interoperability in the industry

2 ETSI TR 103 535 V1.1.1 (2019-10)

Reference
DTR/SmartM2M-103535
Keywords
interoperability, IoT, oneM2M, privacy, SAREF,
semantic
ETSI
650 Route des Lucioles
F-06921 Sophia Antipolis Cedex - FRANCE

Tel.: +33 4 92 94 42 00  Fax: +33 4 93 65 47 16

Siret N° 348 623 562 00017 - NAF 742 C
Association à but non lucratif enregistrée à la
Sous-Préfecture de Grasse (06) N° 7803/88

Important notice
The present document can be downloaded from:
http://www.etsi.org/standards-search
The present document may be made available in electronic versions and/or in print. The content of any electronic and/or
print versions of the present document shall not be modified without the prior written authorization of ETSI. In case of any
existing or perceived difference in contents between such versions and/or in print, the prevailing version of an ETSI
deliverable is the one made publicly available in PDF format at www.etsi.org/deliver.
Users of the present document should be aware that the document may be subject to revision or change of status.
Information on the current status of this and other ETSI documents is available at
https://portal.etsi.org/TB/ETSIDeliverableStatus.aspx
If you find errors in the present document, please send your comment to one of the following services:
https://portal.etsi.org/People/CommiteeSupportStaff.aspx
Copyright Notification
No part may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying
and microfilm except as authorized by written permission of ETSI.
The content of the PDF version shall not be modified without the written authorization of ETSI.
The copyright and the foregoing restriction extend to reproduction in all media.

© ETSI 2019.
All rights reserved.
DECT™, PLUGTESTS™, UMTS™ and the ETSI logo are trademarks of ETSI registered for the benefit of its Members.

3GPP™ and LTE™ are trademarks of ETSI registered for the benefit of its Members and
of the 3GPP Organizational Partners.
oneM2M™ logo is a trademark of ETSI registered for the benefit of its Members and
of the oneM2M Partners. ®
GSM and the GSM logo are trademarks registered and owned by the GSM Association.
ETSI
3 ETSI TR 103 535 V1.1.1 (2019-10)
Contents
Intellectual Property Rights . 6
Foreword . 6
Modal verbs terminology . 6
1 Scope . 7
1.1 Context for the present document . 7
1.2 Scope of the present document . 7
2 References . 7
2.1 Normative references . 7
2.2 Informative references . 7
3 Definition of terms, symbols and abbreviations . 10
3.1 Terms . 10
3.2 Symbols . 10
3.3 Abbreviations . 10
4 Semantic interoperability in the context of IoT . 12
4.1 A global approach to IoT Systems . 12
4.1.1 Major characteristics of IoT systems . 12
4.1.2 The need for an "IoT-centric" view . 12
4.1.2.1 Introduction . 12
4.1.2.2 Roles . 12
4.1.2.3 Reference Architecture(s) . 13
4.1.2.4 Guidelines . 13
4.2 Purpose and target group . 13
4.3 Content of the present document . 13
5 State of the art of semantic interoperability . 14
5.1 Semantic interoperability: Approaches and classification systems . 14
5.1.1 Semantic approaches. 14
5.1.2 Classification systems . 15
5.1.3 Ontologies components and types . 15
5.2 Existing solutions from academia, standards and industry . 16
5.2.1 H2020 IoT European Platform Initiative (IoT-EPI) . 16
5.2.1.1 Introduction . 16
5.2.1.2 The SymbIoTe project . 16
5.1.1.3 The Agile IoT project . 17
5.2.1.4 The Inter IoT project . 18
5.2.1.5 The Vicinity project . 20
5.2.1.6 The BIG-IoT project . 21
5.2.2 H2020 Large Scale Pilots (LSP) . 23
5.2.2.1 Introduction . 23
5.2.2.2 The Autopilot Project . 23
5.2.2.3 The ACTIVAGE LSP . 24
5.2.2.4 The Monica LSP . 25
5.2.3 Standards . 27
5.2.3.1 Introduction . 27
5.2.3.2 oneM2M . 27
5.2.3.3 Smart Device Template (SDT) . 28
5.2.3.4 NGSI-LD . 29
5.2.3.5 OPC-UA . 30
5.2.3.6 ETSI SAREF . 32
5.2.3.7 W3C SSN . 35
5.2.4 Industry Solutions . 36
5.2.4.1 Watson . 36
5.2.5 Open source . 37
5.2.5.1 Mainflux . 37
5.2.6 Other projects . 38
ETSI
4 ETSI TR 103 535 V1.1.1 (2019-10)
5.2.6.1 Pilot Test for interfacing oneM2M platform with Smart Agriculture (STF-542) . 38
6 Semantic interoperability adoption analysis . 40
6.1 The need for semantic interoperability in industry . 40
6.2 Status of semantic adoption by industry . 40
6.2.1 Introduction. 40
6.2.2 Manual file export and import . 40
6.2.3 Extract, Transform and Load (ETL) . 41
6.2.4 Point-to-Point integration (P2P) . 41
6.2.5 Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) . 41
6.2.6 Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) . 41
6.2.7 Semantic interoperability platform . 41
6.3 Market drivers . 41
6.3.0 Introduction. 41
6.3.1 Improving existing services . 41
6.3.2 Providing new services . 42
6.3.3 Public policy support . 42
6.4 Market inhibitors . 42
6.4.1 Introduction. 42
6.4.2 Lack of familiarity with semantic . 42
6.4.3 Lack of killer applications and successful cases . 42
6.4.4 Complexity and immaturity . 42
6.4.5 Uncertainty regarding scalability and performance . 42
6.4.6 Difficulties to perceive immediate value . 43
6.5 The ontology problem . 43
6.5.1 Introduction. 43
6.5.2 No generally-accepted upper ontology in use today . 43
6.5.3 Many fragmented knowledge niches . 43
6.5.4 The ontology integration nightmare . 43
7 Guidelines for using semantic interoperability in the industry. 44
7.1 Introduction . 44
7.2 Strategy guidelines . 44
7.2.1 Decide adoption and promote it . 44
7.2.2 Invest in communication and training . 44
7.2.3 Outline expectation upfront . 44
7.2.4 Promote success and expand diffusion . 44
7.3 Technical Guidelines . 45
7.3.1 Use an upper ontology . 45
7.3.2 Reuse existing domain ontologies . 45
7.3.3 Insert ontologies in the development process . 45
Annex A: Change History . 46
History . 47

ETSI
5 ETSI TR 103 535 V1.1.1 (2019-10)
List of figures
Figure 1: Possible approaches to semantic interoperability.14
Figure 2: SymbIoTe data model .16
Figure 3: Partial view of Agile IoT gateway data model .17
Figure 4: INTER-IOT interoperability global approach .18
Figure 5: GOIoTP platform module .19
Figure 6: GOIoTP device module .19
Figure 7: High-level logical VICINITY architecture .20
Figure 8: VICINITY ontology network .21
Figure 9: Conceptual-BIG-IoT model-for-an-IoT-ecosystem .22
Figure 10: Model for describing offerings of IoT platforms, things or services .22
Figure 11: Model for describing IoT offering compositions .23
Figure 12: AUTOPILOT interworking components .23
Figure 13: AUTOPILOT data model .24
Figure 14: Overall ACTIVAGE architecture .25
Figure 15: The MONICA Concept .26
Figure 16: MONICA global architecture .27
Figure 17: SDT structure overview .28
Figure 18: NGSI-LD Information model .30
Figure 19: OPC-UA support for Information Models .31
Figure 20: OPC UA Companion Specifications .31
Figure 21: Main classes of the SAREF ontology .32
Figure 22: SAREF type of devices .33
Figure 23: Mapping between SAREF and the oneM2M Base Ontology .34
Figure 24: Overview of the SSN classes and properties (observation perspective) .35
Figure 25: Overview of the SSN classes and properties (actuation perspective) .36
Figure 26: IBM Watson data model .37
Figure 27: SenML data model labels.38
Figure 28: Interworking Reference Model in the Agriculture Equipment .39
Figure 29: Pilot semantic model (main classes) .39

ETSI
6 ETSI TR 103 535 V1.1.1 (2019-10)
Intellectual Property Rights
Essential patents
IPRs essential or potentially essential to normative deliverables may have been declared to ETSI. The information
pertaining to these essential IPRs, if any, is publicly available for ETSI members and non-members, and can be found
in ETSI SR 000 314: "Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs); Essential, or potentially Essential, IPRs notified to ETSI in
respect of ETSI standards", which is available from the ETSI Secretariat. Latest updates are available on the ETSI Web
server (https://ipr.etsi.org/).
Pursuant to the ETSI IPR Policy, no investigation, including IPR searches, has been carried out by ETSI. No guarantee
can be given as to the existence of other IPRs not referenced in ETSI SR 000 314 (or the updates on the ETSI Web
server) which are, or may be, or may become, essential to the present document.
Trademarks
The present document may include trademarks and/or tradenames which are asserted and/or registered by their owners.
ETSI claims no ownership of these except for any which are indicated as being the property of ETSI, and conveys no
right to use or reproduce any trademark and/or tradename. Mention of those trademarks in the present document does
not constitute an endorsement by ETSI of products, services or organizations associated with those trademarks.
Foreword
This Technical Report (TR) has been produced by ETSI Technical Committee Smart Machine-to-Machine
communications (SmartM2M).
Modal verbs terminology
In the present document "should", "should not", "may", "need not", "will", "will not", "can" and "cannot" are to be
interpreted as described in clause 3.2 of the ETSI Drafting Rules (Verbal forms for the expression of provisions).
"must" and "must not" are NOT allowed in ETSI deliverables except when used in direct citation.

ETSI
7 ETSI TR 103 535 V1.1.1 (2019-10)
1 Scope
1.1 Context for the present document
The design, development and deployment of - potentially large - IoT systems require to address a number of topics -
such as privacy, interoperability or privacy - that are related and should be treated in a concerted manner. In this
context, several Technical Reports have been developed that each address a specific facet of IoT systems.
In order to provide a global a coherent view of all the topics addressed, a common approach has been outlined across
the Technical Reports concerned with the objective to ensure that the requirements and specificities of the IoT systems
are properly addressed and that the overall results are coherent and complementary.
The present document has been built with this common approach also applied in all of the other documents listed
below:
• ETSI TR 103 533 [i.1]
• ETSI TR 103 534 [i.2]
• ETSI TR 103 536 [i.3]
• ETSI TR 103 537 [i.4]
• ETSI TR 103 591 [i.5]
1.2 Scope of the present document
Major efforts are on-going in the IoT community regarding the development of semantic interoperability for IoT. This
progress has been notably accomplished by the involvement from academic players. However, semantic in IoT is
complex, often misunderstood and its benefits are not well perceived by the industrial players.
The main objective of the present document is to push semantic interoperability in IoT forward in raising awareness
about its importance in industry in order to unlock the potential economic value of IoT. A major focus is on the
development of guidelines on how to use semantic interoperability in the industry.
2 References
2.1 Normative references
Normative references are not applicable in the present document.
2.2 Informative references
References are either specific (identified by date of publication and/or edition number or version number) or
non-specific. For specific references, only the cited version applies. For non-specific references, the latest version of the
referenced document (including any amendments) applies.
NOTE: While any hyperlinks included in this clause were valid at the time of publication, ETSI cannot guarantee
their long term validity.
The following referenced documents are not necessary for the application of the present document but they assist the
user with regard to a particular subject area.
[i.1] ETSI TR 103 533: "SmartM2M; Security; Standards Landscape and best practices".
[i.2] ETSI TR 103 534 (all parts): "SmartM2M; Teaching Material".
ETSI
8 ETSI TR 103 535 V1.1.1 (2019-10)
[i.3] ETSI TR 103 536: "SmartM2M; Strategic/technical approach on how to achieve
interoperability/interworking of existing standardized IoT Platforms".
[i.4] ETSI TR 103 537: "SmartM2M; PlugtestsTM preparation on Semantic Interoperability".
[i.5] ETSI TR 103 591: "SmartM2M; Privacy study report; Standards Landscape and best practices".
[i.6] AIOTI Report: "High Level Architecture (HLA) Release 4.0 June 2018".
NOTE: Available at https://aioti.eu/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/AIOTI-HLA-R4.0.7.1-Final.pdf.
[i.7] IoT-EPI: "IoT Platforms Interoperability Approaches", White Paper, IoT-EPI Platform
Interoperability Task Force, 2017 updated in 2018 by "Advancing IoT Platforms Interoperability
Book", July 2018, White Paper.
NOTE: Available at http://iot-epi.eu/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Advancing-IoT-Platform-Interoperability-2018-
IoT-EPI.pdf.
[i.8] Inter-IoT project.
NOTE: Available at http://www.inter-iot-project.eu.
[i.9] InterIoT GOIoTP: "Generic Ontology for IoT Platforms".
NOTE: Available at http://docs.inter-iot.eu/ontology.
[i.10] VICINITY project.
NOTE: Available at https://www.vicinity2020.eu.
[i.11] VICINITY Deliverable D1.6: "VICINITY Architectural Design".
NOTE: Available at https://www.vicinity2020.eu/vicinity/content/d16-vicinity-architectural-design.
[i.12] BIG-IoT project.
NOTE: Available at http://big-iot.eu/.
[i.13] Stefan Schmid et al: "An Architecture for Interoperable IoT Ecosystems". 2nd International
Workshop on Interoperability & Open Source Solutions for the Internet of Things (InterOSS-IoT
2016) at the 6th International Conference on the Internet of Things (IoT 2016), 7 November 2016,
Stuttgart, Germany. Springer, LNCS.
[i.14] A.S. Thuluva et al: Recipes for IoT Applications: "The 7th International Conference on the
Internet of Things (IoT 2017)", 22.-25. October 2017, Linz, Austria. ACM.
[i.15] ACTIVEAGE project.
NOTE: Available at http://www.activageproject.eu.
[i.16] ACTIVAGE Deliverable D3.2: "ACTIVAGE Interoperability layer architecture".
[i.17] MONICA project.
NOTE: Available at http://www.monica-project.eu.
[i.18] MONICA Deliverable D3.1: "IoT Enabled Devices and Wearables 2", 2018.
NOTE: Available at https://www.monica-project.eu/sdm_downloads/d3-2-iot-enabled-devices-and-wearables-2/.
[i.19] S. Meiling and al: MONICA in Hamburg: "Towards Large-Scale IoT Deployments in a Smart
City".
[i.20] ETSI TS 103 264: "SmartM2M; Smart Appliances; Reference Ontology and oneM2M Mapping".
NOTE: Available at https://www.etsi.org/standards#page=1&search=TS%20103%20264.
ETSI
9 ETSI TR 103 535 V1.1.1 (2019-10)
[i.21] ETSI TS 103 410 (all parts): "SmartM2M; Smart Appliances Extension to SAREF".
NOTE: Available at https://www.etsi.org/standards#page=1&search=TS%20103%20410.
[i.22] ETSI TS 118 112: "oneM2M; Base Ontology (oneM2M TS-0012 version 2.0.0 Release 2)".
[i.23] ETSI SAREF: "SAREF ontology".
NOTE: Available at http://saref.etsi.org. The documentation of SAREF v2.1.1 will be available here soon. The
source of the ontology are available as Turtle or RDF/XML Visualize it with VOWL.
[i.24] W3C SSN Editor's Draft: "Semantic Sensor Network Ontology".
NOTE: Available at http://w3c.github.io/sdw/ssn/.
[i.25] W3C Recommendation: "Semantic Sensor Network ontology".
NOTE: Available at https://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-ssn/.
[i.26] ETSI TR 118 507: "oneM2M; Study on Abstraction and Semantics Enablement (oneM2M
TR-0007 Release 2)".
[i.27] Moreira, J. L., Daniele, L. M., Ferreira Pires, L., van Sinderen, M. J., Wasielewska, K., Szmeja, P.,
Paprzycki, M. (2017): "Towards IoT platforms' integration: Semantic Translations between W3C
SSN and ETSI SAREF". Paper presented at SEMANTiCS conference 2017, Amsterdam,
Netherlands.
[i.28] Mainflux project.
NOTE: Available at https://www.mainflux.com/.
[i.29] Ervin Varga, Draško Draškovic, Dejan Mijic: "Scalable Architecture for the Internet of Things",
Publisher: O'Reilly Media, Inc., February 2018, ISBN: 9781492024132.
[i.30] ETSI TR 103 545: "SmartM2M; Pilot test definition and guidelines for testing cooperation
between oneM2M and Ag equipment standards".
[i.31] ISO 11783: "Tractors and machinery for agriculture and forestry -- Serial control and
communications data network".
[i.32] ETSI EN 302 637-3: "Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS); Vehicular Communications; Basic Set
of Applications; Part 3: Specifications of Decentralized Environmental Notification Basic
Service".
[i.33] IETF RFC 8428: "Sensor Measurement Lists (SenML)", C. Jennings et al. August 2018.
[i.34] Nova: Nova, 2004: "The Ontology Problem: A Definition with Commentary".
[i.35] Jaehun Joo (2011): "Adoption of Semantic Web from the perspective of technology innovation: A
grounded theory approach". Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud. 69, 3 (March 2011), 139-154.
[i.36] ETSI TS 118 121: "oneM2M; oneM2M and AllJoyn® Interworking (oneM2M TS-0021)".
[i.37] ETSI TS 118 114: "oneM2M; LWM2M Interworking (oneM2M TS-0014)".
[i.38] ETSI TS 118 124: "oneM2M; OIC Interworking (oneM2M TS-0024)".
[i.39] ETSI TR 118 556: "oneM2M; Summary of Differences between Release 2A & Release 3
(oneM2M TR-0056)".
[i.40] ETSI TS 118 133: "Interworking Framework (oneM2M TS-0033 v0.1.1)".
ETSI
10 ETSI TR 103 535 V1.1.1 (2019-10)
3 Definition of terms, symbols and abbreviations
3.1 Terms
For the purposes of the present document, the following terms apply:
cyber security (or cybersecurity): collection of tools, policies, security concepts, security safeguards, guidelines, risk
management approaches, actions, training, best practices, assurance and technologies that can be used to protect the
cyber environment and organization and user's assets
domain ontology: concepts which belong to a part of the world, such as energy, building or Environment
IoT LSP: Internet of Things Large Scale Pilots which are part of the H2020 Work Program 2016-2017
oneM2M: Partnership Project (EPP) on M2M launched by a number of SSOs including ETSI
Open Source Software (OSS): computer software that is available in source code form
NOTE: The source code and certain other rights normally reserved for copyright holders are provided under an
open-source license that permits users to study, change, improve and at times also to distribute the
software.
source code: any collection of computer instructions written using some human-readable computer language, usually as
text
standard: output from a Standards Setting Organization (SSO)
Standards Setting Organization (SSO): any entity whose primary activities are developing, coordinating,
promulgating, revising, amending, reissuing, interpreting or otherwise maintaining standards that address the interests
of a wide base of users outside the standards development organization
NOTE: In the present document, SSO is used equally for both Standards Setting Organization or Standards
Developing Organizations (SDO).
upper ontology: also called a top-level ontology or foundation ontology, is an ontology that models very general
concepts common across several domains
NOTE: An important function of an upper ontology is to support broad semantic interoperability among a large
number of domain-specific ontologies by providing a common starting point for the formulation of
definitions.
3.2 Symbols
Void.
3.3 Abbreviations
For the purposes of the present document, the following abbreviations apply:
AD Automated Driving
ADN Application Dedicated Node
AE Application Entity
AEF Agricultural Industry Electronics Foundation
AIOTI Alliance for the Internet of Things Innovation
API Application Programming Interface
ASN Application Service Node
BLE Bluetooth Low Energy
CBOR Concise Binary Object Representation
CEN European Committee for Standardization
CIM Core Information Model
ETSI
11 ETSI TR 103 535 V1.1.1 (2019-10)
CSE Common Service Entity
DATEX Data Exchange format For Exchanging Traffic Information
DL Description Logic
DMAG Data Modelling Activity Group
DSF Demand-side Flexibility
EC European Commission
EPI European Platforms Initiative
ERP Enterprise Resource Planning
ESB Enterprise Service Bus
ETL Extract, Transform and Load
ETSI European Telecommunications Standards Institute
EXI Efficient XML Interchange
GPS Global Positioning System
HGI Home Gateway Initiative
ICT Information and Communication Technology
IIoT Industrial IoT
IoT Internet of Things
IoT-EPI IoT European Platform Initiative
iPaaS Integration Platform as a Service
ISG Industry Specification Group
ISO International Organization for Standardization
ITS Intelligent Transport System
JSON JavaScript Object Notation
LSP Large Scale Pilot
M2M Machine-to-Machine
MN Middle Node
MQTT Message Queuing Telemetry Transport
NGSI Next Generation Service Interface
OGC Open Geospatial Consortium
OIC Open Interconnect Consortium
OPC Open Platform Communications
OPC-UA OPC Unified Architecture
OSS Open Source Software
OWL OntologyWeb Language
P2P Point-to-Point
PIM Platform-Specific Information Model
RDF Resource Description Framework
SAREF Smart Applications REFerence ontology
SDO Standard Development Organization
SDT Smart Device Template
SEAS Smart Energy Aware Systems
SIL Semantic Interoperability Layer
SOSA Sensor, Observation, Sampler and Actuator
SPINE Smart Premises Interoperable Neutral-message Exchange
SSN Semantic Sensor Network
SSO Standards Setting Organization
TC Technical Committee
UA Unified Architecture
URL Uniform Resource Locator
W3C World Wide Web Consortium
WoT Web of Things
XML eXtensible Markup Language
ETSI
12 ETSI TR 103 535 V1.1.1 (2019-10)
4 Semantic interoperability in the context of IoT
4.1 A global approach to IoT Systems
4.1.1 Major characteristics of IoT systems
IoT systems are often seen as an extension to existing systems needed because of the (potentially massive) addition of
networked devices. However, this approach does not take stock of a set of essential characteristics of IoT systems that
push for an alternative approach where the IoT system is at the centre of attention of those who want to make them
happen. This advocates for an "IoT-centric" view.
Most of the above-mentioned essential characteristics may be found in other ICT-based systems. However, the main
difference with IoT systems is that they all have to be dealt with simultaneously. The most essential ones are:
• Stakeholders. There is a large variety of potential stakeholders with a wide range of roles that shape the way
each of them can be considered in the IoT system. Moreover, none of them can be ignored.
• Privacy. In the case of IoT systems that deal with critical data in critical applications (e.g. e-Health, Intelligent
Transport, Food, Industrial systems), privacy becomes a make or break property.
• Interoperability. There are very strong interoperability requirements because of the need to provide seamless
interoperability across many different systems, sub-systems, devices, etc.
• Security. As an essential enabling property for Trust, security is a key feature of all IoT systems and needs to
be dealt with in a global manner. One key challenge is that it is involving a variety of users in a variety of use
cases.
• Technologies. By nature, all IoT systems have to integrate potentially very diverse technologies, very often for
the same purpose (with a risk of overlap). The balance between proprietary and standardized solutions has to
be carefully managed, with a lot of potential implications on the choice of the supporting platforms.
• Deployment. A key aspect of IoT systems is that they emerge at the very same time where Cloud Computing
and Edge Computing have become mainstream technologies. All IoT systems have to deal with the need to
support both Cloud-based and Edge-based deployments with the associated challenges of management of data,
etc.
• Legacy. Many IoT systems have to deal with legacy (e.g. existing connectivity, back-end ERP systems). The
challenge is to deal with these requirements without compromising the "IoT centric" approach.
4.1.2 The need for an "IoT-centric" view
4.1.2.1 Introduction
In support of an "IoT-centric" approach, some elements have been used in the present document in order to:
• support the analysis of the requirements, use cases and technology choices (in particular related to
interoperability);
• ensure that the target audience can benefit from recommendations adapted to their needs.
4.1.2.2 Roles
A drawback of many current approaches to system development is an exclusive focus on the technical solutions without
considering the individual in these multiple capacities (e.g. user of an IoT device, professional) which may lead to
suboptimal or even ineffective systems that hinder maximizing the benefits of IoT. In the case of IoT systems, a very
large variety of potential stakeholders are involved, each coming with specific - and potentially conflicting -
requirements, expectations and, possibly, vested interests. Their elicitation requires that the precise definition of roles
that can be related to in the analysis of the requirements, of the use cases, etc.
ETSI
13 ETSI TR 103 535 V1.1.1 (2019-10)
Examples of such roles to be characterized and analysed are System Designer, System Developer, System Deployer,
End-user, Device Manufacturer. Certain these roles are to an extent addressed in the present document.
4.1.2.3 Reference Architecture(s)
In order to better achieve interoperability, many elements (e.g. vocabularies, definitions, models) have to be defined,
agreed and shared by the IoT stakeholders. This can ensure a common understanding across them of the concepts used
for the IoT system definition. They also are a preamble to standardization. Moreover, the need to be able to deal with a
great variety of IoT systems architectures, it is also necessary to adopt Reference Architectures, in particular Functional
Architectures.
4.1.2.4 Guidelines
The very large span of requirements, Use Cases and roles within an IoT system make it difficult to provide prototypical
solutions applicable to all of the various issues addressed. The approach taken in the present document is to outline
some solutions but also to provide guidelines on how they can be used depending on the target audience. Such
guidelines are associated to the relevant roles and provide support for the decision-making. The AIOTI High-Level
Architecture (see [i.6]) will be referred to in the present document.
4.2 Purpose and target group
The present document addresses the topic of semantic interoperability in the context of its potential usage by the
industry in the development of IoT systems. The main objective of the present document is to concretely foster the use
of semantic interoperability in IoT by identify why it is important in industry IoT projects, to analyse the advantages
and drawback of the available solutions and to provide guidelines on how to use semantic interoperability in the
industry in order to unlock the overall economic value of IoT.
The target group for the present document is the community of people that design, develop, implement and validate IoT
systems, that have to understand the benefits of semantic interoperability, to decide on the modality and extent of its
usage and to characterize and prepare the necessary actions (e.g. training) with respect to those who will use it in the
development of IoT systems.
4.3 Content of the present document
Clause 5 is making an in-depth analysis of the state-of-the-art of semantic interoperability. It defines the different
approaches that are used, in particular the ontologies. The solutions from academics, standards and industry are
analysed and compared.
Clause 6 is giving different aspects of the adoption of semantic interoperability with the case of the industry as a
specific case. To this extent, after analysing the approaches currently adopted in the industry to deal with
interoperability, it addresses the drivers and inhibitors to market adoption. The case of ontologies is analysed in detail in
order to understand what the blocking factors are and how they can be overcome.
Clause 7 is providing concrete and actionable guidelines towards those in charge of making decisions regarding the use
of semantic interoperability solutions and of implementing those decisions within the overall IoT systems technical and
cultural development environment.
ETSI
14 ETSI TR 103 535 V1.1.1 (2019-10)
5 State of the art of semantic interoperability
5.1 Semantic interoperability: Approaches and classification
systems
5.1.1 Semantic approaches
The main expectation of semantic interoperability is to provide a shared unambiguous meaning of what the "things" that
two (or more) platforms may agree upon, thus bridging the potential semantic gap coming from different descriptions
and implementations of the "thing" under concern. The challenge of semantic interoperability is in general a
cross-platform issue, though it can be also met with two components on the same platform.
The IoT European Platforms Initiative (IoT-EPI) has addressed this issue (see [i.7]) in a global manner with a model
that is depicted in Figure 1. There are two dimensions in their analysis:
• the main approaches related to the technical solution that can range from a single Core Information
Model (CIM) that every platform need to comply to (irrespective of the domain or sector) up to the possibility
to define the models that a platform considers as appropriate, w
...