#MAGICDRAW UML TO OWL SERIES#

A type attribute specifies the type of the packagedElement. The basic idea is that a packagedElement owns other elements. Typical XMI container structures look like the example below, from the CMOF UML Infrastructure Model. More information can be found at this page on the OMG Website.ĬMOF includes fully fledged associations, association generalization, property subsetting and redefinition, derived unions, and package merge. CMOF stands for Complete Meta Object Facility and is an OMG standard for the UML 2 model interchange. CMOF was more the motivation of meta model developers.

The separation of MOF into EMOF and CMOF was motivated by the influence of EMF's Ecore, and model-driven Java development. MOF 2.0 was developed in tandem with UML 2.0. MOF 1.4 resulted in its mapping to Java being codified in the Java Community Process (JCP) as the Java Metadata Initiative (JMI). Such a mechanism is needed as it is a legal scenario for a single UML model to be serialized to more than one XMI file.īackgrounder on MOFMOF began at the time of CORBA and the need for IDL interfaces. The XMI spec also defines a mechanism for how one XMI element references another, within and across XMI files. The main purpose of XMI is to define how the XML elements are organized within an XMI file. This requires a strategy for converting from the XML structures of XMI to OWL models.īackgrounder on XMIXMI, the XML Metadata Interchange standard is a serialization format for UML Models. The approach must be able to convert UML by processing XMI files from specific tools. Out of scope, currently, are all of the other UML models such as Interaction Diagrams and State Diagrams. Goals, Objectives and RequirementsThe OWL Models must faithfully represent packages and the logical models or class diagrams. Clicking on such a diagram will open a new window with a larger depiction of the diagram.

Note that some diagrams may be too small to be viewed in the body of the document. Those who have deep knowledge of XMI and MOF may want to skip sections 2 and 3, but I would welcome their feedback on the accuracy of my statements. Those who just need to have an overview of the approach could skip sections 9 through 12. Readers who are very interested in the detailed technical approach, should read all sections of this blog in order.

Generation of UML Package Relationships.

Generation of UML Class Superclass Relationships.

How the Transformations from UML to OWL Work.

The content of this blog is organized as follows:

Converting UML Models to OWL - Part 3: Examples of Industry UML Model Transformations.

Converting UML Models to OWL - Part 2: Transforming UML Models to OWL Using SPARQL.

Converting UML Models to OWL - Part 1: The Approach.

#MAGICDRAW UML TO OWL SERIES#

The complete series of blogs, as currently conceived, is as follows: UML to OWL - Part 1 ContentsPart 1 of the series explains the basis of the approach. The inverse, however, is not true and will require another blog series. UML class diagrams can be represented in OWL without information loss. Using a model-based transformation approach, based on SPARQL Rules, XMI models of UML models can be converted to OWL. Nonetheless we have done transformations of UML to OWL. The vagaries of MOF, CMOF and EMOF create their own challenges. The exchange format XMI is not only is difficult to understand but also has vendor-specific extensions. UML Models are notoriously hard to exchange between UML tools, let alone be transformed into OWL.

Increasingly, there is interest in having content of UML models re-purposed in RDF/OWL and the need for RDF/OWL to interoperate with systems built from UML Models. Convert UML to OWL - why would you ever want to do this? One reason suffices: many enterprise models, that serve as either standards or enterprise schemas, are specified in UML.

Magicdraw uml to owl