Search Mailing List Archives


Limit search to: Subject & Body Subject Author
Sort by: Reverse Sort
Limit to: All This Week Last Week This Month Last Month
Select Date Range     through    

[protege-owl] API as Ontology

Jean-Marc Vanel jeanmarc.vanel at gmail.com
Mon Aug 31 06:47:56 PDT 2009


Hi Faraz

If I understand well, you have a bunch of Java classes (or interfaces) , and
you want to translate that into OWL.

Obviously you want to apply these rules:

Java class --> OWL class
Java properties (JavaBean properties) --> OWL property
Java instance --> OWL instance

Now methods are a different beast. What I would do is add them as predicates
applied to the OWL classes, because there is no OWL equivalent of methods
(functions).
About the predicates and classes to use for modelling methods, I feel that
the best is to reuse an established vocabulary, namely UML.
Right now, with the EulerGUI project (http://eulergui.sourceforge.net/), I'm
working to translate all of UML2 metamodel into OWL. I already have a raw N3
(RDF) representation of it, and I'm tuning the translation rules.
Please stay tuned:). But this not mandatory for your needs.

To actually generate the OWL + UML annotations for methods, you could do
straightforward Java introspection, from Class to Method to parameters. Then
generate N3 turtle, much easier than RDF-XML.

Hope this helps.

2009/8/31 Faraz Fallahi <faraz.fallahi at googlemail.com>

> hi
>
> im trying to generate an ontology out of an API. Now i wonder if how i
> should represent the different elements. Some essential questions bother me
> :
>
> Should an Object be represented as a concept or as an instance? When i
> represent them as concepts should a function be represented as the instance
> of its Object concept or is it better to represent functions as instances of
> a generell concept called "function"?
> My first thought was to represent classes (objects) as concepts and their
> functions as instances. I tried to google similar works for inspirations but
> with no success yet.
>
> I would really enjoy a little discussion about this and your thoughts. If
> you know about "API ontologies" i would really appreciate it if you could
> forward me.
>
> greetings
> faraz
>
> _______________________________________________
> protege-owl mailing list
> protege-owl at lists.stanford.edu
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-owl
>
> Instructions for unsubscribing:
> http://protege.stanford.edu/doc/faq.html#01a.03
>
>


-- 
Jean-Marc Vanel
Consulting, services, training,
Rule-based programming, Semantic Web
http://jmvanel.free.fr/
+33 (0)6 89 16 29 52 -- +33 (0)1 39 55 58 16
( we rarely listen to voice messages, please send a mail instead )
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.stanford.edu/pipermail/protege-owl/attachments/20090831/d56973f5/attachment.html>


More information about the protege-owl mailing list