W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-wg@w3.org > August 2008

Re: AW: Peter's slides about the MOF metamodel

From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2008 06:23:17 -0400
Message-Id: <290D2482-15C3-4958-98EB-DA2273D7DB5D@gmail.com>
Cc: "'Peter Haase'" <haase@fzi.de>, "'Boris Motik'" <boris.motik@comlab.ox.ac.uk>, <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
To: <conrad.bock@nist.gov>


On Aug 5, 2008, at 4:45 PM, Conrad Bock wrote:

> Alan,
>
>>  Either:
>
>>  1) The Model is presented in one place, and portion of a document
>>  that defines a syntax explicitly gives how one maps from the syntax
>>  to the model or
>
> This assumes we have one metamodel for multiple syntaxes, see  
> discussion
> with Bijan.
>
>>  2) The Model that is presented interleaved with the functional style
>>  syntax models that syntax.
>
> This is the case in the syntax document.  A model of that particular
> syntax is inteleaved with the rest of the documentation on that  
> syntax.
>
>>  The current situation asks for confusion. We have two different
>>  things presented as if they are one.
>
> Sorry, didn't follow, are #1 and #2 the two things we're currently
> doing?

It is my impression that we are doing neither. My take is that we  
have a model related to, but not of, the syntax, as the order of  
elements in the expressions is not captured and in the functional  
syntax order matters.

So to get to 1 we would pull the model out and make mapping explicit  
or to get to 2 we would add ordering to the model.

-Alan
Received on Wednesday, 6 August 2008 16:03:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 6 August 2008 16:03:02 GMT