0
Using Ontologies Using UML or OWL Rinke Hoekstra
UML  (1) <ul><li>Integration of competing OO standards </li></ul><ul><li>Language for communicating and documenting  softw...
UML  (2) <ul><li>Difficult to define a uniform semantics </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Meta-model approach </li></ul></ul><ul><ul>...
OWL  (1) <ul><li>Standard language for the representation of Ontologies on the SW </li></ul><ul><li>Language to be handled...
Syntax <ul><li>UML </li></ul><ul><ul><li>XML serialization of UML diagrams in XMI </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>XMI non-stand...
Generalizations/Subclasses <ul><li>UML </li></ul><ul><ul><li>‘ substitution’-relation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>not (nece...
Associations/Properties <ul><li>UML </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Not ‘first class’, i.e. dependent on class </li></ul></ul><ul><u...
Packages/Namespaces <ul><li>UML Packages </li></ul><ul><ul><li>No standard </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Internal to Case too...
Reasoning  (1) <ul><li>UML </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Basic syntax checking </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>OCL </li></ul></ul><ul><...
Reasoning  (1) <ul><li>A primary task of OWL is  classification </li></ul><ul><li>Classification brings  definitional  bia...
Rules  (1) <ul><li>UML has OCL  </li></ul><ul><ul><li>OCL expresses rules (invariants) and constraints </li></ul></ul><ul>...
Rules  (2) <ul><li>UML </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Rule is a production rule, or material implication </li></ul></ul><ul><li>OWL...
Tools  (1) <ul><li>UML </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Many, closed-source tools (RR, Mega, Poseidon) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Har...
Tools  (2) <ul><li>OWL </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Standard DL classifiers </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Future: DIG interface for ...
Tools  (3) <ul><li>OCL Constraints </li></ul><ul><ul><li>In annotation-field (No check) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>OWL Restric...
Protégé <ul><li>Open Source (Java) </li></ul><ul><li>Extensible (plug-ins) </li></ul><ul><li>Well-documented </li></ul><ul...
Protégé Interface <ul><li>If (Student OR Employee) </li></ul><ul><li>AND </li></ul><ul><li>NOT (Student AND Employee) </li...
Protégé OWLViz
Protégé for UML Addicts <ul><li>ez OWL </li></ul><ul><ul><li>UML Class-diagram like editing environment </li></ul></ul><ul...
(Un)Lucky for us <ul><li>Translation possibilities of UML Class diagrams (Falkovych et al., Schreiber, DUET) </li></ul><ul...
Sources <ul><li>http://www.w3.org/TR/NOTE-rdf-uml/ </li></ul><ul><li>http://www.swi.psy.uva.nl/usr/Schreiber/docs/owl-uml/...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Rinke Owl Uml 20040428

664

Published on

Published in: Technology, Education
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
664
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
12
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Transcript of "Rinke Owl Uml 20040428"

  1. 1. Using Ontologies Using UML or OWL Rinke Hoekstra
  2. 2. UML (1) <ul><li>Integration of competing OO standards </li></ul><ul><li>Language for communicating and documenting software designs </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Notation is graphical , not formal </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>OCL needed for formal constraints </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>UML aims at maximal expressivity (union vs. intersection) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Different ‘model types’, for different aspects of a system (12) </li></ul></ul>
  3. 3. UML (2) <ul><li>Difficult to define a uniform semantics </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Meta-model approach </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Stereotypes </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Class-diagrams used for Ontology specification </li></ul>
  4. 4. OWL (1) <ul><li>Standard language for the representation of Ontologies on the SW </li></ul><ul><li>Language to be handled by systems </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Well-founded logical semantics </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Set of logical constraints ‘embedded’ </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Principle of minimality (to the benefit of logical reasoning) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Semantics founded on DL (SHIQ) </li></ul>
  5. 5. Syntax <ul><li>UML </li></ul><ul><ul><li>XML serialization of UML diagrams in XMI </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>XMI non-standard </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>No other XML standards embedded (tools) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>OWL </li></ul><ul><ul><li>OWL syntax is RDF(S) is XML </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Abstract syntax </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Uses other XML standards (ID’s, xml:lang, XSD) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Allows: tight integration with other XML standards </li></ul></ul>
  6. 6. Generalizations/Subclasses <ul><li>UML </li></ul><ul><ul><li>‘ substitution’-relation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>not (necessarily) transitive </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>stereotypes </li></ul></ul><ul><li>OWL </li></ul><ul><ul><li>subclass relation is ‘subset’-relation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Transitive </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Meta-classes (Full) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Consequence: no taxonomies in UML (?!) </li></ul>
  7. 7. Associations/Properties <ul><li>UML </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Not ‘first class’, i.e. dependent on class </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>n-ary associations possible </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Every association different (names) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>OWL </li></ul><ul><ul><li>‘ first class’, i.e. independent of class </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>DL: Only binary associations (Full: reification) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Subproperties </li></ul></ul>
  8. 8. Packages/Namespaces <ul><li>UML Packages </li></ul><ul><ul><li>No standard </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Internal to Case tool / Repository </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Distributed identity </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Package references </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Semi-modular </li></ul></ul><ul><li>OWL Namespaces </li></ul><ul><ul><li>URI/URN standard </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Global identity </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Central identity </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>OWL imports or direct reference (via URI) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Modular </li></ul></ul>
  9. 9. Reasoning (1) <ul><li>UML </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Basic syntax checking </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>OCL </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Competing formalizations </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Reasoning non-standard </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Compilation/translation necessary for reasoning </li></ul></ul><ul><li>OWL </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Consistency checking </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Deriving new knowledge (Classification) </li></ul></ul>
  10. 10. Reasoning (1) <ul><li>A primary task of OWL is classification </li></ul><ul><li>Classification brings definitional bias </li></ul><ul><li>UML has a functional bias </li></ul><ul><li>Is that bad? Yes... </li></ul>
  11. 11. Rules (1) <ul><li>UML has OCL </li></ul><ul><ul><li>OCL expresses rules (invariants) and constraints </li></ul></ul><ul><li>OWL has itself, plus... </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Restrictions on properties (local vs. at class) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Restrictions on classes </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>In the making: SWRL (RuleML) etc. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Sidenote: things expressed as rules are not always rules! </li></ul><ul><li>Sidenote: new W3C charters in the making: Rules and Queries </li></ul>
  12. 12. Rules (2) <ul><li>UML </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Rule is a production rule, or material implication </li></ul></ul><ul><li>OWL </li></ul><ul><ul><li>“ Rule” is a conjunction </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Norms are conjunctions + deontic operator </li></ul><ul><li>Conflicts </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Norms: logical conflict </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Rules: multiple rules ‘fit’, but only one may fire </li></ul></ul>
  13. 13. Tools (1) <ul><li>UML </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Many, closed-source tools (RR, Mega, Poseidon) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Hardly any open source tools </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Non standard </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Visual, no taxonomic view </li></ul></ul><ul><li>OWL </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Some open source tools (Protégé, OILEd) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Some closed source tools (OntoEdit) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Standard </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Taxonomic view, optional visualization. </li></ul></ul>
  14. 14. Tools (2) <ul><li>OWL </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Standard DL classifiers </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Future: DIG interface for Jena http://www.sts.tu-harburg.de/~r.f.moeller/racer/interface1.1.pdf </li></ul></ul>
  15. 15. Tools (3) <ul><li>OCL Constraints </li></ul><ul><ul><li>In annotation-field (No check) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>OWL Restrictions </li></ul><ul><ul><li>In text-editor (No check) or, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>In specifically tailored editor (check) </li></ul></ul>
  16. 16. Protégé <ul><li>Open Source (Java) </li></ul><ul><li>Extensible (plug-ins) </li></ul><ul><li>Well-documented </li></ul><ul><li>Large user community </li></ul><ul><li>International </li></ul><ul><li>OWL Plugin with constraint-editor </li></ul><ul><li>Classifier, consistency checker </li></ul>
  17. 17. Protégé Interface <ul><li>If (Student OR Employee) </li></ul><ul><li>AND </li></ul><ul><li>NOT (Student AND Employee) </li></ul><ul><li>AND </li></ul><ul><li>Personal-Role </li></ul><ul><li>Then PhDStudent </li></ul>
  18. 18. Protégé OWLViz
  19. 19. Protégé for UML Addicts <ul><li>ez OWL </li></ul><ul><ul><li>UML Class-diagram like editing environment </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Full expressivity of OWL </li></ul></ul><ul><li>XMI export/import </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Not up-to-date with latest version & OWL </li></ul></ul>
  20. 20. (Un)Lucky for us <ul><li>Translation possibilities of UML Class diagrams (Falkovych et al., Schreiber, DUET) </li></ul><ul><li>UML profile for OWL possible </li></ul><ul><li>OCL has no formal semantics  translation always biased. </li></ul><ul><li>UML2 supposed to bring some relief </li></ul><ul><li>OWL has a problem with value ranges </li></ul>
  21. 21. Sources <ul><li>http://www.w3.org/TR/NOTE-rdf-uml/ </li></ul><ul><li>http://www.swi.psy.uva.nl/usr/Schreiber/docs/owl-uml/owl-uml.html </li></ul><ul><li>http://www.cs.vu.nl/~heiner/public/KTSW.pdf </li></ul><ul><li>http://codip.grci.com/wwwlibrary/wwwlibrary/DUET_Docs/DAML-UML_CoreMapping_V5.htm </li></ul>
  1. A particular slide catching your eye?

    Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.

×