RE: Turtle/UML

We do the opposite - we generate RDF and OWL from UML models.  We find the UML tools much more mature (Our favorite is Magicdraw) and the notation more stakeholder friendly.  We also generate other artifacts (code, descriptors, XML, etc) from the same models which include other system aspects such as services and processes. We could easily gen turtle.  We use UML extended a bit with profiles but it is mostly normal UML, for full-boat OWL more extension to UML is needed but most of our requirements don't call for full-boat OWL.  The UML subset used for LoD seems at about the right semantic level for many applications.

Regards,
Cory Casanave

From: Andrea Splendiani (RRes-Roth) [mailto:andrea.splendiani@rothamsted.ac.uk]
Sent: Sunday, December 18, 2011 2:47 PM
To: Deepak Nadig
Cc: <semantic-web@w3.org>
Subject: Re: Turtle/UML

Hi,

Turtle is a "low level" language. From a generic you are unlikely to derive meaningful UML.
You could imagine than a fragment of Turtle will contain a few rdf:type or x:subClassOf expressions and hence try to model these as UML classes/subclasses. And you could use property assertions to derive properties in UML.
In this case what you would be doing would be to derive UML from rdf/owl/x properties (which can be expressed in turtle, as in other syntaxes).
While this seems a straightforward thing to do, it may turn out to be painful if you are not clear about your application case. There are no schemas or models in RDF/Turtle, and when you see classes and properties, they are not the same thing you think of in UML.
Modeling in UML and serializing in RDF/Turtle is more doable.

my 2 cents,

best,
Andrea

Il giorno 16/dic/2011, alle ore 17.26, Deepak Nadig ha scritto:



Are there any tools that can generate UML class/object diagrams from Turtle?

Thanks,
Deepak