Home » Modeling » EMF » EMF extension
|
| Re: EMF extension [message #427242 is a reply to message #427241] |
Sat, 07 February 2009 16:00   |
 Hossam Karim
Messages: 26
Registered: July 2009 |
Junior Member |
|
|
If I understand your question correctly, instance specifications would be
mapped to EMF model instances
On Sat, 07 Feb 2009 17:06:55 +0200, Daniel OKOUYA <okouya_d@yahoo.fr>
wrote:
> Following the discusion on UML Profile and EMF, as I¹m not very strong at
> the pofile mechanims I would to ask a specific question:
>
> Is it possible to support instance specification mechanims in a model
> using
> profile. I mean, introducing the concept of instance specification in
> EMF.
>
> I¹m asking that because I have been stuck recently in trying to
> implement a
> metamodel in Emf that is related to ontology. To make it short,
> The problem with ontology is that you always have tow level. The concept
> level and the instance level which would map to instance specification
> level
> in UML I suppose.
>
> If someone can be more clear for me here that might be helpful.
>
> Imagine that you have the concept of Role, Objective, Parameter, type.
> In
> other terms, Roles have objective that have parameter of certain type.
> The
> problem here is that I would like to have has type, my possible type, the
> type Role, objective. Now relating that to the ontology, the whole idea
> was
> to be able to load concept of the ontology at the same level as role,
> objective etc..
> This would that the Type in objective could be predefined type (the
> metamodel: Role, Objective) and new type coming from the ontology. Finaly
> when defining a role for instance ³buyer² You are defining an instance in
> the ontology and and maybe an instance specification in your metamodel.
> All
> of this to say, that I did not fully support it, because instance
> specification wasn't there I mean in EMF.
>
> If you Have any suggestions? Ideas, Critics, question, Please do not
> hesitate ,
>
> Many thanks,
> Maatari
>
>
|
|
|
| Re: EMF extension [message #427244 is a reply to message #427242] |
Sat, 07 February 2009 16:26 |
maatari
Messages: 74
Registered: July 2009 |
Member |
|
|
Hi,
YES we could say that. That would be more or less the semantic in this case.
On 2/7/09 5:00 PM, in article op.uozn3oibhvsg55@hkarim, "Hossam Karim"
<hossam.karim@gmail.com> wrote:
> If I understand your question correctly, instance specifications would be
> mapped to EMF model instances
>
> On Sat, 07 Feb 2009 17:06:55 +0200, Daniel OKOUYA <okouya_d@yahoo.fr>
> wrote:
>
>> Following the discusion on UML Profile and EMF, as I¹m not very strong at
>> the pofile mechanims I would to ask a specific question:
>>
>> Is it possible to support instance specification mechanims in a model
>> using
>> profile. I mean, introducing the concept of instance specification in
>> EMF.
>>
>> I¹m asking that because I have been stuck recently in trying to
>> implement a
>> metamodel in Emf that is related to ontology. To make it short,
>> The problem with ontology is that you always have tow level. The concept
>> level and the instance level which would map to instance specification
>> level
>> in UML I suppose.
>>
>> If someone can be more clear for me here that might be helpful.
>>
>> Imagine that you have the concept of Role, Objective, Parameter, type.
>> In
>> other terms, Roles have objective that have parameter of certain type.
>> The
>> problem here is that I would like to have has type, my possible type, the
>> type Role, objective. Now relating that to the ontology, the whole idea
>> was
>> to be able to load concept of the ontology at the same level as role,
>> objective etc..
>> This would that the Type in objective could be predefined type (the
>> metamodel: Role, Objective) and new type coming from the ontology. Finaly
>> when defining a role for instance ³buyer² You are defining an instance in
>> the ontology and and maybe an instance specification in your metamodel.
>> All
>> of this to say, that I did not fully support it, because instance
>> specification wasn't there I mean in EMF.
>>
>> If you Have any suggestions? Ideas, Critics, question, Please do not
>> hesitate ,
>>
>> Many thanks,
>> Maatari
>>
>>
>
|
|
|
| Re: EMF extension [message #427245 is a reply to message #427241] |
Sat, 07 February 2009 18:30 |
Ed Merks
Messages: 33141
Registered: July 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------020002020603040309020807
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Maatari,
Unfortunately it makes my brain hurt, so I'm not sure what to say. Sorry...
Daniel OKOUYA wrote:
> Following the discusion on UML Profile and EMF, as I'm not very strong
> at the pofile mechanims I would to ask a specific question:
>
> Is it possible to support instance specification mechanims in a model
> using profile. I mean, introducing the concept of instance
> specification in EMF.
>
> I'm asking that because I have been stuck recently in trying to
> implement a metamodel in Emf that is related to ontology. To make it
> short,
> The problem with ontology is that you always have tow level. The
> concept level and the instance level which would map to instance
> specification level in UML I suppose.
>
> If someone can be more clear for me here that might be helpful.
>
> Imagine that you have the concept of Role, Objective, Parameter,
> type. In other terms, Roles have objective that have parameter of
> certain type. The problem here is that I would like to have has type,
> my possible type, the type Role, objective. Now relating that to the
> ontology, the whole idea was to be able to load concept of the
> ontology at the same level as role, objective etc..
> This would that the Type in objective could be predefined type (the
> metamodel: Role, Objective) and new type coming from the ontology.
> Finaly when defining a role for instance "buyer" You are defining an
> instance in the ontology and and maybe an instance specification in
> your metamodel. All of this to say, that I did not fully support it,
> because instance specification wasn't there I mean in EMF.
>
> If you Have any suggestions? Ideas, Critics, question, Please do not
> hesitate ,
>
> Many thanks,
> Maatari
>
--------------020002020603040309020807
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<font face="Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><span
style="font-size: 11pt;">Maatari</span></font>,<br>
<br>
Unfortunately it makes my brain hurt, so I'm not sure what to say.
Sorry...<br>
<br>
<br>
Daniel OKOUYA wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:C5B3621F.FBC%25okouya_d@yahoo.fr" type="cite">
<title>EMF extension</title>
<font face="Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><span
style="font-size: 11pt;">Following the discusion on UML Profile and
EMF, as I’m not very strong at the pofile mechanims I would to ask a
specific question:<br>
<br>
Is it possible to support instance specification mechanims in a model
using profile. I mean, introducing the concept of instance
specification in EMF. <br>
<br>
I’m asking that because I have been stuck recently in trying to
implement a metamodel in Emf that is related to ontology. To make it
short,<br>
The problem with ontology is that you always have tow level. The
concept level and the instance level which would map to instance
specification level in UML I suppose.<br>
<br>
If someone can be more clear for me here that might be helpful. <br>
<br>
Imagine that you have the concept of Role, Objective, Parameter, type.
In other terms, Roles have objective that have parameter of certain
type. The problem here is that I would like to have has type, my
possible type, the type Role, objective. Now relating that to the
ontology, the whole idea was to be able to load concept of the ontology
at the same level as role, objective etc..<br>
This would that the Type in objective could be predefined type (the
metamodel: Role, Objective) and new type coming from the ontology.
Finaly when defining a role for instance “buyer” You are defining an
instance in the ontology and and maybe an instance specification in
your metamodel. All of this to say, that I did not fully support it,
because instance specification wasn't there I mean in EMF. <br>
<br>
If you Have any suggestions? Ideas, Critics, question, Please do not
hesitate , <br>
<br>
Many thanks,<br>
Maatari<br>
<br>
</span></font>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>
--------------020002020603040309020807--
Ed Merks
Professional Support: https://www.macromodeling.com/
|
|
|
| Re: EMF extension [message #427252 is a reply to message #427241] |
Sun, 08 February 2009 01:10 |
Jim Van Dam
Messages: 38
Registered: July 2009 |
Member |
|
|
Hi Daniel,
I had to reread your e-mail a couple of times so please tell me if I am
completely misunderstanding your question. My interpretation of your
question is that you would like to be able to:
1) create a metamodel X defining certain concepts
2) create a separate metamodel Y defining new concepts related to X
(using metamodel X in your definitions)
3) create models using both the concepts from X and Y at the same level
My answer would be:
a) sounds like metamodel extensions, pointing to either profiles for
UML2 or Annotations in ecore
b) if you need more structure than Annotations and don't want to use
UML2 you could also create your own solution defining Y as a
specialization and loading metamodel X and Y together (don't complain to
Ed if this backfires on you ;-)
c) impossible if Y is really a different metalevel (true instances of X
concepts) and X is not defined using a metamodel that is it's own
metamodel (like ecore)
Jim
Daniel OKOUYA wrote:
> Following the discusion on UML Profile and EMF, as I’m not very strong
> at the pofile mechanims I would to ask a specific question:
>
> Is it possible to support instance specification mechanims in a model
> using profile. I mean, introducing the concept of instance specification
> in EMF.
>
> I’m asking that because I have been stuck recently in trying to
> implement a metamodel in Emf that is related to ontology. To make it short,
> The problem with ontology is that you always have tow level. The concept
> level and the instance level which would map to instance specification
> level in UML I suppose.
>
> If someone can be more clear for me here that might be helpful.
>
> Imagine that you have the concept of Role, Objective, Parameter, type.
> In other terms, Roles have objective that have parameter of certain
> type. The problem here is that I would like to have has type, my
> possible type, the type Role, objective. Now relating that to the
> ontology, the whole idea was to be able to load concept of the ontology
> at the same level as role, objective etc..
> This would that the Type in objective could be predefined type (the
> metamodel: Role, Objective) and new type coming from the ontology.
> Finaly when defining a role for instance “buyer” You are defining an
> instance in the ontology and and maybe an instance specification in your
> metamodel. All of this to say, that I did not fully support it, because
> instance specification wasn't there I mean in EMF.
>
> If you Have any suggestions? Ideas, Critics, question, Please do not
> hesitate ,
>
> Many thanks,
> Maatari
>
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Fri Apr 26 03:39:45 GMT 2024
Powered by FUDForum. Page generated in 0.03928 seconds |
] 
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
