Re: Enhancing object-oriented programming with OWL

There has been a lot of work in this area - perhaps incomplete and
inconclusive?

I don't think it started quite here with Henry Story:-
https://blogs.oracle.com/bblfish/entry/java_annotations_the_semantic_web
This work becomes So(m)er referred to in this round up:-
http://semanticweb.com/binding-java-objects-to-rdf_b10682

Of the tools mentioned in that article, and the classification given for
available tools, how does this proposal fit?

Adam

On 21 August 2012 10:53, Denny Vrandečić <denny.vrandecic@wikimedia.de>wrote:

> Maybe interesting:
>
> <http://alexanderpaar.blogspot.de/p/zhisharp-owl-aware-compilation.html>
>
> <http://www.aifb.kit.edu/web/Inproceedings937>
>
> Sorry for the self-promotion.
>
> Cheers,
> Denny
>
> 2012/8/21 John Flynn <jflynn12@verizon.net>:
> > I am somewhat surprised that someone hasn't created a dedicated Semantic
> Web
> > applications development language by now. I tried, unsuccessfully, to get
> > government funding for this idea shortly after the DAML to OWL
> transition.
> > It seems to me one of the handicaps to the widespread development of
> > Semantic Web based applications is the lack of a specialized computer
> > language that uses OWL ontologies and instance data as native data
> > structures. Such a language would include constructs designed to
> manipulate
> > and access specified ontologies and data. It shouldn't be particularly
> > difficult to design a language along these lines and to implement it in a
> > compiler. It would probably make for a fairly decent computer science
> > master's thesis.
> >
> > John Flynn
> > Algol-M: http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a047266.pdf
> > VisioOWL: http://mysite.verizon.net/jflynn12/VisioOWL/VisioOWL.htm
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Martynas Jusevičius [mailto:martynas@graphity.org]
> > Sent: Monday, August 20, 2012 5:51 PM
> > To: Timothy Armstrong
> > Cc: semantic-web@w3.org
> > Subject: Re: Enhancing object-oriented programming with OWL
> >
> > Timothy,
> >
> > I understand you want to get the object model to work as close to OWL as
> > possible? But what is your motivation?
> >
> > If it is to make systems more flexible and generic by enabling OWL
> features
> > in them, you might get better results by discarding the domain object
> level
> > altogether. I don't think this issue can be solved by trying to fix model
> > mismatches since abstractions are leaky (I dare to say ORMs have not
> > succeeded). The need for such complex development as compiler
> reengineering
> > is a good indication of this.
> >
> > What is simple and works is keeping as close as possible to the single
> > pivotal model we currently have -- RDF/OWL, and its API such as Jena.
> >
> > Martynas
> > graphity.org
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Project director Wikidata
> Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Obentrautstr. 72 | 10963 Berlin
> Tel. +49-30-219 158 26-0 | http://wikimedia.de
>
> Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V.
> Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg
> unter der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das
> Finanzamt für Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985.
>
>