- From: Chris Welty <cawelty@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2007 18:35:07 -0500
- To: "Public-Rif-Wg (E-mail)" <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
RIFWG, Our 5th F2F meeting ended Wednesday. A couple outcomes and news items you should be aware of will follow in subsequent messages. One of the biggest sources of confusion regarding the CORE spec was the way in which the UML diagrams were being interpreted. The fact that some people wanted to call them MOF Metamodels, some an Abstract Syntax, and some an ontology (when these are really three different things) concerned me from the start, and these different perspectives made for a real breakdown in communication, as no one seemed to understand what anyone else meant. In the end, we resolved the confusion as follows: The UML diagrams are NOT metamodels nor ontologies. This does not preclude us from doing a RIF CORE metamodel, or an ontology of rule languages, but the UML diagrams Sandro has sent around are generated automatically from the asn06 syntax, such that a subclass relation is really a syntactic "or" and the aggregation relation is really a syntactic concatenation. We resolved to call these diagrams what they are: "graphical views of the asn06 syntax using UML notation." These diagrams will appear in the 1st CORE WD as such. -CC&S -- Dr. Christopher A. Welty IBM Watson Research Center +1.914.784.7055 19 Skyline Dr. cawelty@gmail.com Hawthorne, NY 10532 http://www.research.ibm.com/people/w/welty
Received on Friday, 2 March 2007 23:35:16 UTC