W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webont-wg@w3.org > November 2001

Re: UML for Ontologies and W3C Web Ontology Working Group

From: Leo Obrst <lobrst@mitre.org>
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2001 14:50:25 -0500
Message-ID: <3BF2CB01.E4C1E7D6@mitre.org>
To: Stefan Decker <stefan@db.stanford.edu>
CC: www-webont-wg@w3.org, melnik@db.stanford.edu
There has also been some recent traffic on www-rdf-interest@w3.org,
including some postings referencing the old Bio Symposium's report on
ontology languages for biological applications, which I think prompted
the creation of XOL [XML Ontology Interchange Language] in 1999, one of
the earlier web ontology languages:

Also, Stephen Cranefield's papers (SCranefield@infoscience.otago.ac.nz).
I'm yanking from his recent message to the RDF list):

"A shorter URL for the same paper is

Also, here is a more recent paper following on from the one above:
(This discusses generating an RDF schema and Java classes from an
ontology in UML in order to support the serialisation of knowledge
modelled as a UML object diagram).

This work uses UML in its own right as an ontology representation
language.  Another approach is to use UML as a graphical notation
for DAML+OIL.  The following two Web sites discuss projects taking
this approach:


I've recently joined the OMG ontology distribution list and am
interested in correlating UML and the Web Ontology work too, as much as


Stefan Decker wrote:
> Dear all,
> you might be interested in a specification of UML in RDF, done by
> Sergey Melnik (see [1]).
> This does not only cover the static aspects of UML, but also dynamic aspects
> (statecharts) as well.
> The Stanford RDF API [2] contains support for UML-RDF models.
> [3] shows an application of the UML vocabulary: a converter from UML/XMI to
>      (update to DAML+OIL in progress)
> And yes, I volunteer to do this.
> [1] http://www-db.stanford.edu/~melnik/rdf/uml/
> [2] http://www-db.stanford.edu/~melnik/rdf/api.html
> [3] http://www.interdataworking.com/converter/
> All the best,
>          Stefan
> --
> At 07:59 AM 11/14/2001, Lynn Andrea Stein wrote:
> >I'm not volunteering to do this either, exactly, as my work on UML
> >predecessors is too long ago to make me a good candidate, but I would be
> >happy to work with someone (or a few someones) from the UML world (and,
> >if others are interested, from the DAML/OIL worlds) on this project.
> >Once upon a time, I was an Object Oriented Person :o)
> >
> > > Message-ID: <3BF24A76.EEF0534B@cs.vu.nl>
> > > Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2001 11:41:58 +0100
> > > From: Frank van Harmelen <Frank.van.Harmelen@cs.vu.nl>
> > > To: W3C Web Ontology WG <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
> > > Subject: Re: UML for Ontologies and W3C Web Ontology Working Group
> > >
> > > Given the prominence of UML in industrial use (certainly in Europe,
> > can't speak for the US), I think we would be wise to link our work with UML.
> > >
> > > A first step that someone could pick up as practical work is to look at
> > the "ontology-like" constructions in UML, which ones of those are often
> > used, and if we can express those in a language like DAML+OIL, and if
> > not, should we include similar constructions. (I know for a fact that
> > some useful (and often used) ontology-like constructions in class
> > diagrams cannot be captured in DAML+OIL).
> > >
> > > Comparing ourselves with UML, and making clear which things of UML we
> > can and cannot capture (and for the latter also why not) will make the
> > road for our language into industrial acceptance much easier.
> > >
> > > (No, I'm not volunteering to do this:-).
> > >
> > > Frank.
> > >    ----

Dr. Leo Obrst		The MITRE Corporation
mailto:lobrst@mitre.org Intelligent Information Management/Exploitation
Voice: 703-883-6770	7515 Colshire Drive, M/S W640
Fax: 703-883-1379       McLean, VA 22102-7508, USA
Received on Wednesday, 14 November 2001 14:51:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:56:40 UTC