Eclipse Community Forums
Forum Search:

Search      Help    Register    Login    Home
Home » Modeling » Modeling (top-level project) » project status
project status [message #375975] Thu, 09 March 2006 00:18 Go to next message
Dave Carlson is currently offline Dave Carlson
Messages: 399
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
I see from the Eclipse site that this project has been approved as of this
morning, so congradulations to the PMC! I look forward to getting more
involved.

The proposal and creation review presentation omitted the EODM metamodel for
OWL, but I assume it will be a subproject here, migrated from EMFT? I have
build a prototype modeling application around EODM and will soon start
working on the UML2 profile for bi-directional transformation between OWL
and UML2. I assume that would fit into this project's charter.

Thanx,
Dave Carlson
www.xmlmodeling.com
Re: project status [message #375977 is a reply to message #375975] Thu, 09 March 2006 12:34 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ed Merks is currently offline Ed Merks
Messages: 26137
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Dave,

The EODM folks pointed out this oversight too; projects like Eike
Stepper's NET4J (reviewed and approved by Eclipse legal but not yet in
CVS) and Martin Taal's Teneo (currently under review by Eclipse legal),
both addressing different aspects of model persistence, were also not
mentioned. So the list in the presentation is not exhaustive and not
being on the list is not an intentional exclusion.

Providing an EODM to UML2 mapping provides an implicit EODM to Ecore
mapping, and both of these would be very cool and useful. I think this
fits very nicely into the overall big picture. Are you interested in
becoming a committer to help work on such a thing?


Dave Carlson wrote:
> I see from the Eclipse site that this project has been approved as of this
> morning, so congradulations to the PMC! I look forward to getting more
> involved.
>
> The proposal and creation review presentation omitted the EODM metamodel for
> OWL, but I assume it will be a subproject here, migrated from EMFT? I have
> build a prototype modeling application around EODM and will soon start
> working on the UML2 profile for bi-directional transformation between OWL
> and UML2. I assume that would fit into this project's charter.
>
> Thanx,
> Dave Carlson
> www.xmlmodeling.com
>
>
>
Re: project status [message #375992 is a reply to message #375977] Thu, 11 May 2006 20:50 Go to previous message
Nicolas Rouquette is currently offline Nicolas Rouquette
Messages: 135
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Dave,

This is very cool and interesting. Which, if any, of the Eclipse GMT
subprojects are you planning or are currently using to do the UML2/EODM
transformation?

The ATL/AM3/AMW subprojects of GMT have a particularly cool approach
for doing UML2/EODM transformation using a process they call weaving
that has had some mileage for UML<->DSL transformations
(see: http://www.eclipse.org/gmt/amw/examples/#UMLProfiles)

The CVS version of the ATL/AM3/AMW enchilada has some support for
using OCL for evaluating constraints but it hasn't yet been updated
yet to leverage the EMFT capabilities. EMFT (the Calisto version)
has an architecture that separates the formalism of the logic in which
constraints are expressed, verified, etc... from the plumbing on top of
EMF required to orchestrate the verification/transformation/etc...
processes. Recent versions of EMFT have support for the recent version
of OMG's OCL2. WIth all of these things in various phases of
progress/maturation, it's unclear to me which transformation approach
is reasonable for UML2/EODM; yet, this is is yesterday's capability
we need for today's problems.

-- Nicolas.

Ed Merks wrote:
> Dave,
>
> The EODM folks pointed out this oversight too; projects like Eike
> Stepper's NET4J (reviewed and approved by Eclipse legal but not yet in
> CVS) and Martin Taal's Teneo (currently under review by Eclipse legal),
> both addressing different aspects of model persistence, were also not
> mentioned. So the list in the presentation is not exhaustive and not
> being on the list is not an intentional exclusion.
>
> Providing an EODM to UML2 mapping provides an implicit EODM to Ecore
> mapping, and both of these would be very cool and useful. I think this
> fits very nicely into the overall big picture. Are you interested in
> becoming a committer to help work on such a thing?
>
>
> Dave Carlson wrote:
>
>> I see from the Eclipse site that this project has been approved as of
>> this morning, so congradulations to the PMC! I look forward to
>> getting more involved.
>>
>> The proposal and creation review presentation omitted the EODM
>> metamodel for OWL, but I assume it will be a subproject here, migrated
>> from EMFT? I have build a prototype modeling application around EODM
>> and will soon start working on the UML2 profile for bi-directional
>> transformation between OWL and UML2. I assume that would fit into
>> this project's charter.
>>
>> Thanx,
>> Dave Carlson
>> www.xmlmodeling.com
>>
>>
>>
Re: project status [message #562447 is a reply to message #375975] Thu, 09 March 2006 12:34 Go to previous message
Ed Merks is currently offline Ed Merks
Messages: 26137
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Dave,

The EODM folks pointed out this oversight too; projects like Eike
Stepper's NET4J (reviewed and approved by Eclipse legal but not yet in
CVS) and Martin Taal's Teneo (currently under review by Eclipse legal),
both addressing different aspects of model persistence, were also not
mentioned. So the list in the presentation is not exhaustive and not
being on the list is not an intentional exclusion.

Providing an EODM to UML2 mapping provides an implicit EODM to Ecore
mapping, and both of these would be very cool and useful. I think this
fits very nicely into the overall big picture. Are you interested in
becoming a committer to help work on such a thing?


Dave Carlson wrote:
> I see from the Eclipse site that this project has been approved as of this
> morning, so congradulations to the PMC! I look forward to getting more
> involved.
>
> The proposal and creation review presentation omitted the EODM metamodel for
> OWL, but I assume it will be a subproject here, migrated from EMFT? I have
> build a prototype modeling application around EODM and will soon start
> working on the UML2 profile for bi-directional transformation between OWL
> and UML2. I assume that would fit into this project's charter.
>
> Thanx,
> Dave Carlson
> www.xmlmodeling.com
>
>
>
Re: project status [message #562692 is a reply to message #375977] Thu, 11 May 2006 20:50 Go to previous message
Nicolas Rouquette is currently offline Nicolas Rouquette
Messages: 135
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Dave,

This is very cool and interesting. Which, if any, of the Eclipse GMT
subprojects are you planning or are currently using to do the UML2/EODM
transformation?

The ATL/AM3/AMW subprojects of GMT have a particularly cool approach
for doing UML2/EODM transformation using a process they call weaving
that has had some mileage for UML<->DSL transformations
(see: http://www.eclipse.org/gmt/amw/examples/#UMLProfiles)

The CVS version of the ATL/AM3/AMW enchilada has some support for
using OCL for evaluating constraints but it hasn't yet been updated
yet to leverage the EMFT capabilities. EMFT (the Calisto version)
has an architecture that separates the formalism of the logic in which
constraints are expressed, verified, etc... from the plumbing on top of
EMF required to orchestrate the verification/transformation/etc...
processes. Recent versions of EMFT have support for the recent version
of OMG's OCL2. WIth all of these things in various phases of
progress/maturation, it's unclear to me which transformation approach
is reasonable for UML2/EODM; yet, this is is yesterday's capability
we need for today's problems.

-- Nicolas.

Ed Merks wrote:
> Dave,
>
> The EODM folks pointed out this oversight too; projects like Eike
> Stepper's NET4J (reviewed and approved by Eclipse legal but not yet in
> CVS) and Martin Taal's Teneo (currently under review by Eclipse legal),
> both addressing different aspects of model persistence, were also not
> mentioned. So the list in the presentation is not exhaustive and not
> being on the list is not an intentional exclusion.
>
> Providing an EODM to UML2 mapping provides an implicit EODM to Ecore
> mapping, and both of these would be very cool and useful. I think this
> fits very nicely into the overall big picture. Are you interested in
> becoming a committer to help work on such a thing?
>
>
> Dave Carlson wrote:
>
>> I see from the Eclipse site that this project has been approved as of
>> this morning, so congradulations to the PMC! I look forward to
>> getting more involved.
>>
>> The proposal and creation review presentation omitted the EODM
>> metamodel for OWL, but I assume it will be a subproject here, migrated
>> from EMFT? I have build a prototype modeling application around EODM
>> and will soon start working on the UML2 profile for bi-directional
>> transformation between OWL and UML2. I assume that would fit into
>> this project's charter.
>>
>> Thanx,
>> Dave Carlson
>> www.xmlmodeling.com
>>
>>
>>
Previous Topic:SA4J & Modeling
Next Topic:GMT is very proud to join EMP
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Wed Oct 22 21:51:59 GMT 2014

Powered by FUDForum. Page generated in 0.02143 seconds
.:: Contact :: Home ::.

Powered by: FUDforum 3.0.2.
Copyright ©2001-2010 FUDforum Bulletin Board Software