- From: Aldo Gangemi <aldo.gangemi@cnr.it>
- Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2014 10:07:20 +0100
- To: Philipp Cimiano <cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de>
- Cc: Aldo Gangemi <aldo.gangemi@cnr.it>, Armando Stellato <stellato@info.uniroma2.it>, "<public-ontolex@w3.org>" <public-ontolex@w3.org>, Silvio Peroni <essepuntato@cs.unibo.it>
Hi Philipp, instead of Poseidon, I forgot to mention Argo UML, which has similar functionalities, but it’s open source :) argouml.tigris.org/ concerning cardinalities, I have the following doubts: 1) is it better to include inverse names as well, or an arrow? I always find counterintuitive that I have to figure out how to read the ordering of associations, while NL is so clear ;) 2) can a lexicon be empty? maybe a 1..* would be better on the lexicon side 3) why 0..1 lexical concepts for a sense? 0 is clear, but why do we impose that e.g. a wordnet word sense should mandatory belong to at most 1 lexical concept. If this is for the synset pattern, then we should put 1..1, otherwise, we can be liberal, and accept that some other lexicon can provide a different sense assemblage. I’d go for a 0..* 4) similarly for the 0..1 references for a sense: do we assume that at most one ontological entity can actualize a sense? OK for the rest Thanks Aldo On Mar 7, 2014, at 7:54:58 AM , Philipp Cimiano <cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de> wrote: > Dear all, > > ok, thanks for the suggestions. I now used Poseidon to generate the diagram attached. > > Do we agree that this is the kind of diagram that we want to have? > > If yes, I will look for another suitable tool as one needs to obtain a Poseidon license to save the models :-o > > Bzw. do we agree on the cardinialities as they are indicated there? > > Philipp. > > Am 06.03.14 22:59, schrieb Aldo Gangemi: >> Two possibilities: >> >> 1) use yEd Graffoo notation: just downlaod the graphml file and put it in the same yEd directory: http://www.essepuntato.it/graffoo/, specification is there. However, cardinalities come as boxes where you can write owl restrictions in Manchester syntax. I put Silvio Peroni in cc, he developed Graffo and DiTTO. >> >> 2) use the ER notation, but as you say, Crow’s foot notation is used instead of numbers to express cardinalities. >> >> Another approximation is the diagram drawer in TopBraid Composer, which (after proper configuration) shows a UML-like notation with numeric cardinalities. It is generated automatically, and editing is not allowed. >> There are other possibilities (e.g. Enrico Franconi’s ICOM), but I should say that the perfect visual bridge between UML and OWL is yet to come. >> >> Using native UML editors like Poseidon are of course a possibility, but the semantics of class diagrams is not necessarily correspondent to OWL semantics (however, who cares if that is just for visually supporting intuition without formal claims …). >> >> Last possibility: use RDF Gravity, and configure nodes and edge filters to obtain what you want. >> >> Aldo >> >> On Mar 6, 2014, at 9:55:26 PM , Philipp Cimiano <cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de> wrote: >> >>> Aldo, all, >>> >>> I started to use yEd. Attached are the two UML diagrams for the ontolex and the vartrans modules. >>> >>> However: how do I add cardinalities to the model using yEd. For instance I would like to say something like that the "sense" relation is functional, i.e. 1..1 -- 1..1 on both sides. >>> >>> How do I say that. I would really like to use some numeric cardinalities rather than weird symbols as people with a general modelling background can read them without knowing the symbols. >>> >>> Any ideas? >>> >>> Philipp. >>> >>> Am 06.03.14 13:24, schrieb Aldo Gangemi: >>>> yEd with the Graffoo plugin >>>> Also model in ER with yEd and convert to DITTO plugin to check the assumptions >>>> >>>> Aldo >>>> >>>> sent by aldo from a mobile >>>> >>>>> On 06/mar/2014, at 13:06, "Armando Stellato" <stellato@info.uniroma2.it> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I used UML Designer >>>>> http://marketplace.eclipse.org/content/uml-designer-eclipse-kepler-version#. >>>>> UxhcsfmwaN0 >>>>> though it depends if it is useful to have a tool in Eclipse... >>>>> >>>>> Another option (probably even better considering we are talking RDF) is the >>>>> one from Top Braid: >>>>> http://composing-the-semantic-web.blogspot.it/2012/06/graphical-ontology-edi >>>>> ting-with.html >>>>> but I think it is only available in the standard edition (not free one) >>>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>> From: Philipp Cimiano [mailto:cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de] >>>>>> Sent: Thursday, March 6, 2014 6:58 AM >>>>>> To: public-ontolex@w3.org >>>>>> Subject: UML diagrams >>>>>> >>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>> >>>>>> I think I would like to include some UML diagrams in our final model >>>>>> specification to give simple overviews of the modules, so we would have >>>>> five >>>>>> UML diagrams ideally ;-) >>>>>> >>>>>> Does anyone know a good tool for producing UML diagrams that runs on >>>>>> Mac/Linux? >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards, >>>>>> >>>>>> Philipp. >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> >>>>>> Prof. Dr. Philipp Cimiano >>>>>> >>>>>> Phone: +49 521 106 12249 >>>>>> Fax: +49 521 106 12412 >>>>>> Mail: cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de >>>>>> >>>>>> Forschungsbau Intelligente Systeme (FBIIS) Raum 2.307 Universität >>>>> Bielefeld >>>>>> Inspiration 1 >>>>>> 33619 Bielefeld >>>>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> Prof. Dr. Philipp Cimiano >>> >>> Phone: +49 521 106 12249 >>> Fax: +49 521 106 12412 >>> Mail: cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de >>> >>> Forschungsbau Intelligente Systeme (FBIIS) >>> Raum 2.307 >>> Universität Bielefeld >>> Inspiration 1 >>> 33619 Bielefeld >>> >>> <ontolex.png><vartrans.png> > > > -- > > Prof. Dr. Philipp Cimiano > > Phone: +49 521 106 12249 > Fax: +49 521 106 12412 > Mail: cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de > > Forschungsbau Intelligente Systeme (FBIIS) > Raum 2.307 > Universität Bielefeld > Inspiration 1 > 33619 Bielefeld > > <ontolex2.png>
Received on Friday, 7 March 2014 09:07:50 UTC