some remarks on VOEvent

[Tony Linde]

Ooohhh!!  Toys!!  Finally something *I* can understand :)

Now, anyone got an ontology-friendly UML tool?

T. 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-semantics at eso.org 
> [mailto:owner-semantics at eso.org] On Behalf Of Ed Shaya
> Sent: 06 June 2005 17:06
> To: semantics at ivoa.net
> Subject: Re: some remarks on VOEvent
> 
> And if one wants to autoconvert UML to OWL there is this tool at
> 
> http://afrodita.rcub.bg.ac.yu/~gasevic/projects/UMLtoOWL/
> 
> 
>       UMLtoOWL: Converter from UML to OWL
> 
>  
> 
> 
>       General information
> 
> The UMLtoOWL tool converts extended Ontology UML Profile 
> (OUP) models in XML Metadata Interchange (XMI) format to The 
> Web Ontology Language (OWL) 
> <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-ref-20040210> ontologies. 
> The tool is implemented by using eXtensible Stylesheet 
> Language Transformation (XSLT). With UMLtoOWL we do not need 
> to modify the existing UML tools. A UML tool can export an 
> XMI document that an XSLT processor (e.g. Xalan Java 2 
> <http://xml.apache.org/xalan-j/index.html>) can use as input. 
> An OWL document is produced as the output, and this format 
> can be imported into a tool specialized for ontology 
> development (e.g. Protégé
> <http://protege.stanford.edu/>) where it can be further refined.
> 
> This work is a part of the Good Old AI 
> <http://goodoldai.org.yu/> research effort to develop an MDA 
> based ontology infrastructure 
> <http://www.comsis.fon.bg.ac.yu/ComSISpdf/Volume01/Papers/Drag
> anDjuric.pdf>.
> 
> Ed
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bernard Vatant wrote:
> 
> >.... to follow-up with my previous message ...
> >
> >Roy Williams wrote :
> >
> >  
> >
> >>More properly we should *not* say VOEvent represents an 
> astrophysical 
> >>event, but rather it represents an *observation* of an event. Each 
> >>observation is assigned an ID.
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >Agreed, iff "an *observation* of an event" is not taken in a naive 
> >realistic view of the world, a la ...
> >
> >1. There was an event to observe (outthere, independently of 
> mine, or 
> >any other,
> >observation)
> >2. I was there, lucky man/woman to catch it : see my data.
> >
> >.... but puts the observation first, and then the event 
> definition, a la :
> >
> >1. I happened to capture this pack of data.
> >2. They seem to make together enough sense, according to 
> my/our current 
> >knowledge - or still better, to our *lack* of knowledge - to 
> be encapsulated inside an "event box".
> >3. My first interpretation is bla bla ...
> >
> >Bernard
> >
> >*************************************************************
> **********
> >***********
> >
> >Bernard Vatant
> >Senior Consultant
> >Knowledge Engineering
> >bernard.vatant at mondeca.com
> >
> >"Making Sense of Content" :  http://www.mondeca.com "Everything is a 
> >Subject" :  http://universimmedia.blogspot.com
> >
> >*************************************************************
> **********
> >***********
> >
> >
> >
> >  
> >
> 
>