Normas Del Turismo

XML Clearinghouse Report 12
Tourism Standards

Herausgeber: Prof. Dr.-Ing. Robert Tolksdorf Freie Universität Berlin Institut für Informatik Netzbasierte Informationssysteme Dr. Rainer Eckstein Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin Institut für Informatik Datenbanken und Informationssysteme ISSN (Print): 1861-1222 ISSN (Internet):1861-1230

team@xml-clearinghouse.de www.xml-clearinghouse.de © XMLClearinghouse

Tourism Standards
Anja Jentzsch jentzsch@inf.fu-berlin.de Institut f¨ r Informatik u AG Netzbasierte Informationssysteme Freie Universit¨ t Berlin a Takustr. 9, 14195 Berlin, Germany

Contents
1 Introduction 2 Standards 2.1 2.2 Accommodation Facility Classification by Deutscher Tourismusverband e.V. 2.1.1 German Hotel Classification / Deutsche Hotelklassifizierung . . . ISO18513:2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3 3 4 5 6 6 7 8 8 9 9 9 9 10 10 12 12 13 13

3 Ontologies And Tools 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 Harmonise - Tourism Harmonisation Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Harmonise Ontology (IMHO) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Harmonise Trans-European Network for Tourism (Harmo-TEN) . . . . . Tourism Ontology by AIFB . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PegsTour by Pegasus Solutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4 Current Research Work 4.1 E-Tourism Working Group (et) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.1.1 4.1.2 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 Ontology Collection in view of an E-Tourism Portal . . . . . . . eTourism Semantic Web Portal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .eCommerce and Tourism Research Laboratory (eCTRL) . . . . . . . . . International Federation for IT and Travel & Tourism (IFITT) . . . . . . . World Tourism Organization (WTO) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . German Text Exploitation and Search System (GETESS) . . . . . . . . .

5 Conclusion

Abstract: This report introduces existing standards, ontologies and tools in the tourism domain.Furthermore it should give a review of current research work in the range of Semantic Web and tourism.

1

Introduction

Today’s tourism environment covers few major actors and a large number of small and medium actors. There exist few standardised large platforms which lack an appropriate mapping of the existing structure to robust semantic descriptions. Standardising the main protocols andontologies is needed but the complexity is too high. So it is impossible to create a meta standard of the tourism industry. Since the consequential charges might be immense when reorganising existing structures, a semantic reconciliation could be useful to harmonize the technical and semantic differences among the existing structures. Although the tourism industry could benefit from better informedconsumers. Furthermore standards are of value to those developing tourism and travel standards. Due to cultural and linguistical differences formulating standard tourism definitions is a difficult task.

2

Standards

When developing tools and ontologies for the tourism domain, many standards can be worth looking at (e.g. accommodation or hotel classifications). Later on the WTO’s Thesaurus onTourism and Leisure Activities (see 4.4) is one of them. Furthermore there are standards for terms and classifications which are presented below.

2.1 Accommodation Facility Classification by Deutscher Tourismusverband e.V. Nowadays not only the travelers demand for more transparency of the accommodation situation, also computer based information and reservation systems require unambiguous andwell-defined categories to characterise the range of services offered. The outcome of these requirements were the classification system for accommodation facilities1 established by German Tourism Organisation (Deutscher Tourismusverband e.V.)2 . This enables a more precise product positioning and therefore better sales opportunities. To classify an accommodation facility specially founded companies and...