Skip to main content


Eclipse Community Forums
Forum Search:

Search      Help    Register    Login    Home
Home » Archived » M2M (model-to-model transformation) » about the ATL use case: UML2OWL
about the ATL use case: UML2OWL [message #35565] Wed, 02 May 2007 07:32 Go to next message
Cyril Faucher is currently offline Cyril FaucherFriend
Messages: 63
Registered: July 2009
Member
Hi,

I hope that is the right place for this kind of post.

Firstly, thank to the Sido group for this nice work.
I have some questions about this implementation of the ODM
specification: UML2OWL.

1. The second step of the process concerns the pretty-printing of the
ontology to an xml syntax.
The XML metamodel (XML.ecore) is used to realise this step, why? EMF can
load a metamodel in xsd such as owl.xsd and EMF allows the serialization
of its model, the result will be an xml file.

2. Why the generated file xxx-OWL.ecore has an extension in ecore.
This one is not a metamodel... that is an OWL model conforms to
OWL.ecore, so its extension should be .owl or .xmi ?

Best regards,
Cyril.
Re: [ATL] about the ATL use case: UML2OWL [message #35667 is a reply to message #35565] Wed, 02 May 2007 14:32 Go to previous message
Guillaume Hillairet is currently offline Guillaume HillairetFriend
Messages: 95
Registered: July 2009
Member
Hi Cyril,

> 1. The second step of the process concerns the pretty-printing of the
> ontology to an xml syntax.
> The XML metamodel (XML.ecore) is used to realise this step, why? EMF can
> load a metamodel in xsd such as owl.xsd and EMF allows the serialization
> of its model, the result will be an xml file.

We've implemented the xml serialization with an OWL2XML transformation
firstly because we wanted to have a complete model transformation scenario
based on ATL, so we show how simple it is to write an xml extractor. And
secondly because i use my own OWL metamodel and it was more simple to
directly write the OWL2XML than using the OWL schema (different from my
metamodel) and EMF.

> 2. Why the generated file xxx-OWL.ecore has an extension in ecore.
> This one is not a metamodel... that is an OWL model conforms to
> OWL.ecore, so its extension should be .owl or .xmi ?

Yes, you've right there's no reason to name this model like that, it's
just a way to do it. When i make model transformation all my models and
metamodels are *.ecore (XMI 2.0). So to distinguish models we named it by
adding its metamodel name as an extension (-OWL in this case). But of
course you can name it has you want (owl, xmi).

Regards
Previous Topic:TCS reference
Next Topic:[ATL] ERROR in moving a single-valued optional reference to a multi-valued reference
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Thu Jan 21 15:55:35 GMT 2021

Powered by FUDForum. Page generated in 0.02061 seconds
.:: Contact :: Home ::.

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

Back to the top