Issue 11107: Set value for annotation property in UML profile for OWL (odm-ftf) Source: International Business Machines (Mr. Guo Tong Xie, xieguot(at)cn.ibm.com) Nature: Clarification Severity: Significant Summary: In section 14.2.3.1, it is not clear on how to set values for annotation property Resolution: Disposition: See issue 12391 for disposition Revised Text: Actions taken: June 20, 2007: received issue January 19, 2009: duplicate, closed Discussion: End of Annotations:===== c: Bob Colomb , Juergen Boldt , odm-ftf@omg.org Subject: Re: Minutes from ODM-FTF telecon of 27 June X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 7.0 HF277 June 21, 2006 From: Guo Tong Xie Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 11:29:11 +0800 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on D23M0037/23/M/IBM(Release 7.0.2HF32 | October 17, 2006) at 07/10/2007 11:29:13, Serialize complete at 07/10/2007 11:29:13 Please find my followup as below. 1. Issue 11105, chapter 10, section 10.7.3, URIReferenceForNamespace should be changed to two uni-directional associations between URIReference and Namespace. In the current model, if two URIReference have the same Namespace, it could not be represented. Actually, we use two uni-directional associations when implementing EODM (http://www.eclipse.org/modeling/mdt/?project=eodm#eodm). 2. Issue 11107, chapter 14, section 14.2.3.1, it is not clear on how to set values for annotation property. In the following example, an AnnotationProperty, creator, is defined. Then an owl:Class, MusicalWork, is defined and its creator is "N.N.". Actually, this is an exmaple from http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/#Annotations. Musical work N.N. The question is that I have no idea on how to set creator of MusicalWork as N.N. by using the current profile. Regards, Guo Tong (Gordon) Xie (л¹úÍ®) Manager, Semantic Integration IBM China Research Lab Email: xieguot@cn.ibm.com Tel: 86-10-58748425 Tieline: 905-8425 Fax: 86-10-58748230 Homepage: http://www.research.ibm.com/people/x/xieguot Address: Building 19 Zhongguancun Software Park, 8 Dongbeiwang WestRoad, Haidian District, Beijing,P.R.C.100094 "Elisa F. Kendall" 2007-06-28 05:15 To odm-ftf@omg.org cc Juergen Boldt , Bob Colomb Subject Minutes from ODM-FTF telecon of 27 June [[Juergen: Would you please put this on the OMG server? Thanks.]] Minutes from ODM-FTF Telecon 27 June 2007 Scribe: Elisa Kendall Participants: Roy Bell Raytheon Elisa Kendall Sandpiper Software Evan Wallace NIST Chris Welty IBM Watson Research Guo Tong Xie IBM China Research Regrets: Saartje Brockmans (FZI/AIFB), Bob Colomb (Universiti Teknologi Malaysia) ***** AGENDA ***** 1. Admin - Approved: minutes of meeting held 20 June 2007 (recorded at http://www.omg.org/cgi-bin/doc?ptc/2007-06-07) 2. Review of outstanding actions Outstanding Action Items prior to telecon: Continues Elisa Kendall to talk with Chris Welty, Pete Rivett, and Bob Colomb to determine their plans wrt the ODM-FTF participation. - Chris Welty & Bob Colomb contacted; Pete Rivett remaining Continues Bobbin Teegarden to talk with Pete Rivett to determine what type of file is needed for the UML profiles in ODM and submit issues requesting these be included for the finalized specification. Continues Saartje to look at issue 10843 (issue regarding whether subclassing of OWL Class takes one out of OWL DL) Continues Chris will post the issues he and other IBM colleagues noted in reviewing the RDF and OWL metamodel chapters in October. Continues Elisa will contact Sreedhar Reddy regarding availability to assist with the QVT vetting for finalization purposes. Complete Elisa will revise the spreadsheet per discussion and upload it to the wiki, add URI to the agenda Complete Elisa will add content for issues outside of chapter 16 (by Roy Bell) Complete Roy will add issues related to chapter 16 Continues Evan will add a page to the wiki for managing issues 3. Discussion of outstanding issues / work items - Discussed WebEx access issues -- Elisa and Evan will attempt to determine the right link to include in future agenda email - Reviewed several issues submitted by Gordon, including 11103 through 11107, as follows 1. Issue 11103, chapter 10, section 10.4.1: the role name of superClass in ClassGeneralization is confusing. Discussion: agreed that superClass seems synonymous with RDFSsubClassOf, and that it should be changed, potentially to superClassOf. Elisa will propose a new figure and search the text to find any relevant references that require revision for resolution, to be discussed at the next telecon. 2. Issue 11104, chapter 10, section 10.5.1: the role name of superProperty in PropertyGeneralization is confusing. Discussion: agreed that superProperty seems synonymous with RDFSsubPropertyOf, and that it should be changed, potentially to superPropertyOf, similarly to 11103, above. Elisa will propose a new figure and search the text to find any relevant references that require revision for resolution, to be discussed at the next telecon. 3. Issue 11105, chapter 10, section 10.7.3, URIReferenceForNamespace should be changed to two uni-directional associations between URIReference and Namespace. In the current model, if two URIReference have the same Namespace, it could not be represented. Discussion: participants thought that we understood the issue, but for clarification and to provide more detail for discussion, Gordon will send examples, including the work-around adopted by IBM to use two uni-directional associations. 4. Issue 11106, chapter 11, section 11.4.5, the cardinality of OWLInverseOf in InverseProperty association should be changed from 0..1 to 0..*. One property can have multiple inverse properties Discussion: we used the example of manages and is managed by, as two inverse properties, with equivalent properties bosses and is bossed by to try to tease out this issue. What Gordon was saying is that is managed by should be capable of having both manages and bosses as inverses, and the current metamodel only allows for a single inverse. After discussion, we agreed that the cardinality should be changed from 0..1 to 0..*. Elisa will propose a new figure, and search the text to find any relevant references that require revision for resolution, to be discussed at the next telecon. 5. Issue 11107, chapter 14, section 14.2.3.1, it is not clear on how to set values for annotation property Discussion: we reviewed the representation for owl:AnnotationProperty as well as the representation of rdf:Property in the profile sections, and were not sure what the issue was here. Gordon will provide some examples so that we can work through this one at the next telecon. - Roy Bell mentioned that he would begin working through some of the issues in chapter 16; Bob Colomb has also offered to assist via email 4. New Actions: ----------- - Elisa and Evan will work out the WebEx link to include in future agenda messages - For issues 11103, 11104, and 11106: Elisa will revise the metamodels, find related text, and propose resolutions based on the results of discussion today - For issues 11105 and 11107, Gordon will provide examples to support additional discussion 5. Administrative Next Wednesday, which would normally be the next scheduled telecon, is a holiday in the US. Thus, we will cancel the telecon on July 4. Also, the following week, July 11, both co-chairs will be attending the 2007 Metadata Open Forum meeting in New York, so not sure whether or not we will both be able to attend the call, depending on the agenda. We will follow up and confirm, likely that week. Revised spreadsheet including updated status of issues discussed in todays telecon is posted to the wiki, at: http://www.omgwiki.org/odmftf/doku.php - Next Scheduled Telecon: Telecon will be held (tentatively), Wednesday 11 July. Set value for annotation property in UML profile for OWL In section 14.2.3.1, it is not clear on how to set values for annotation property