- From: Elisa F. Kendall <ekendall@sandsoft.com>
- Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2008 09:45:59 -0700
- To: "Pedro Assis @ City of Porto" <pfa@isep.ipp.pt>
- CC: Carlos Tejo Alonso <carlos.tejo@fundacionctic.org>, Content-wire Research <editor@content-wire.com>, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>, semantic-web@w3.org
Thanks Pedro Carlos -- There is a standard UML notation in the form of a UML profile (and related metamodel) corresponding to the ISO specification (and is very close, if not identical to the ISO document) in the Ontology Definition Metamodel from the OMG. See http://www.omg.org/docs/ptc/07-09-09.pdf. This is normative, and once ODM is finalized in September, will be submitted to the ISO community via the ISO PAS process. We would be delighted to have any comments/feedback if you do decide to use it. Thanks, Elisa Pedro Assis @ City of Porto wrote: > Carlos, > > Topic maps is an ISO/IEC standard, which play a similar role than RDF > (from W3C). Nevertheless, it is not RDF based. See Lars Garshol’s > article : "Living with topic maps and RDF". > > In the ISO/IEC 13250-2 "Topic Maps - Part 2: Data Model" it is used > UML (version 1.5) to depict graphically Topic Maps itens according to > UML concepts: classes, associations, aggregations, etc. But I don’t > think that it is stated anywhere that this is the standard way. The > metamodel and the data model elements are describe in textual form. >
Received on Wednesday, 4 June 2008 16:46:44 UTC