- From: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 11:05:55 +0100
- To: jimbobbs <jimbobbs@hotmail.com>
- cc: www-rdf-interest <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
>>>Jimmy Cerra said: > > Hey, > > Let's say we have the following N-Triples [1]: > > &e;#John &e;#age 22 > &e;#John &rdf;#type &e;#Person > > &e;#Person &rdfs;#subClassOf &rdfs;#Class > &e;#age &rdf;#type &rdf;#Property > &e;#age &rdfs;#domain &e;#Person > &e;#age &rdfs;#range &e;#Literal Not-really N-Triples, just call it your own invention, but anyway > > Could the above triples be represented by the following UML graph: > > See http://purl.org/jfc/2003/04/30-rdf2uml.gif > > I'm probably wrong, but at least this is a start. There seems to be > very little information on the web about transforming UML graphs into > RDF triples [2,3] - and nothing on the inverse relationship. The > purpose is to find a more concise way (relative to the standard graphic > notation) of representing RDF data that has been validated to an > RDF-schema. You might care to look at: A UML Presentation Syntax for OWL Lite Author: Guus Schreiber April 2002 http://www.swi.psy.uva.nl/usr/Schreiber/docs/owl-uml/owl-uml.html I found from this email from Masahiro Hori to the Web Ontology working group: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Jan/0167.html You might care to contact the authors of those or look at the pointers to the OMG work on ontologies. Dave
Received on Wednesday, 30 April 2003 06:08:36 UTC