A metamodel and UML profile for rule-extended OWL PL ontologies

Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)

Volumn 4011 LNCS, Issue , 2006, Pages 303-316

  Brockmans, Saartje ^a   Haase, Peter ^a   Hitzler, Pascal ^a   Studer, Rudi ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KARLSRUHE   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTATIONAL METHODS; COMPUTER SIMULATION; COMPUTER SOFTWARE; METADATA; OBJECT ORIENTED PROGRAMMING; SEMANTICS;

METAMODEL; MOF; UML TOOL; WEB RULE LANGUAGE (SWRL);

COMPUTER PROGRAMMING LANGUAGES;

EID: 33746087582     PISSN: 03029743     EISSN: 16113349     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1007/11762256_24     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (23)

1. J. Angele, H. Boley, J. de Bruijn, D. Fensel, P. Hitzler, M. Kifer, R. Krummenacher, H. Lausen, A. Polleres, and R. Studer. Web Rule Language (WRL). World Wide Web Consortium, September 2005. W3C Member Submission, http://www.w3.org/Submission/WRL/
2. S. Brockmans and P. Haase. A Metamodel and UML Profile for Rule-extended OWL DL Ontologies -A Complete Reference. Technical report, Universität Karlsruhe, March 2006. http://www.aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de/WBS/sbr/ publications/owl-metamodeling.pdf.
3. S. Brockmans, R. Volz, A. Eberhart, and P. Loeffer. Visual Modeling of OWL DL Ontologies using UML. In F. van Harmelen, S. A. Mcllraith, and D. Plexousakis, editors, The Semantic Web - ISWC 2004, pages 198-213. Springer-Verlag, 2004.
4. P. P. Chen. The entity-relationship model - toward a unified view of data. ACM Transactions on Database Systems, l(1):9-36, 1976.
5. M. Fowler. UML Distilled. Addison-Wesley, third edition, 2004.
6. B. R. Gaines. An Interactive Visual Language for Term Subsumption Languages. In J. Mylopoulos and R. Reiter, editors, Proc. of 12th Int. Joint Conf. on Art. Int., pages 817-823, Sydney, Australia, August 1991. Morgan Kaufmann.
7. B. Grosof, M. Kifer, and D. L. Martin. Rules in the Semantic Web Services Language (SWSL): An overview for standardization directions. In Proceedings of the W3C Workshop on Rule Languages for Interoperability, 27-28 April 2005, Washington, DC, USA, 2005.
8. L. Hart, P. Emery, B. Colomb, K. Raymond, S. Taraporewalla, D. Chang, Y. Ye, and M. D. Elisa Kendall. OWL full and UML 2.0 compared, March 2004. http://www.itee.uq.edu.au/$\sim$colomb/Papers/UML-OWLont04.03.01. pdf.
9. I. Horrocks, P. F. Patel-Schneider, H. Boley, S. Tabet, B. Grosof, and M. Dean. SWRL: A Semantic Web Rule Language Combining OWL and RuleML. World Wide Web Consortium, May 2004. W3C Member Submission, http://www.w3.org/Submission/ 2004/SUBM-SWRL-20040521/.
10. IBM, Sandpiper Software. Ontology Definition Metamodel, Fourth Revised Submission to OMG, November 2005.
11. ISO/IEC. Topic Maps: Information Technology - Document Description and Markup Languages. ISO/IEC 13250. http://www.y12.doe.gov/sgml/sc34/document/0129. pdf, December 1999.
12. R. Kremer. Visual Languages for Knowledge Representation. In Proc. of 11th Workshop on Knowledge Acquisition, Modeling and Management (KAW'98), Voyager Inn, Banff, Alberta, Canada, April 1998. Morgan Kaufmann.
13. B. Motik, U. Sattler, and R. Studer. Query answering for OWL-DL with rules. In F. van Harmelen, S. Mcllraith, and D. Plexousakis, editors, International Semantic Web Conference, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 549-563, Hiroshima, Japan, 2004. Springer.
14. Object Management Group. Meta Object Facility (MOF) Specification. Technical report, Object Management Group (OMG), April 2002. http://www.omg.org/docs/formal/02-04-03.pdf.
15. Object Management Group. MOF 2.0 Query / Views / Transformations - Request for Proposal, http://www.omg.org/docs/ad/02-04-10.pdf, 2002.
16. Object Management Group. Ontology Definition Metamodel - Request For Proposal, March 2003. http://www.omg.org/docs/ontology/03-03-01.rtf.
17. P. F. Patel-Schneider, P. Hayes, and I. Horrocks. OWL Web Ontology Language Semantics and Abstract Syntax. World Wide Web Consortium, 10. Februar 2004. Recommendation. http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-semantics-20040210/.
18. W. Schnotz. Wissenserwerb mit Texten, Bildern und Diagrammen. In L. J. Issing and P. Klimsa, editors, Information und Lernen mit Multimedia und Internet, pages 65-81. Beiz, PVU, Weinheim, third, completely revised edition, 2002.
19. J. F. Sowa. Conceptual graphs summary. In P. Eklund, T. Nagle, J. Nagle, and L. Gerholz, editors, Conceptual Structures: Current Research and Practice, pages 3-52. Ellis Horwood, New York, 1992.
20. Accepted Papers of the WSC Workshop on Rule Languages for Interoperability, 27-28 April 2005, Washington, DC, USA, 2005. http://www.w3.org/2004/12/rules-ws/accepted.
21. W3C. Rule interchange format working group charter. http://www.w3.org/ 2005/rules/wg/charter, 2005.
22. A. Walker. Understandability and semantic interoperability of diverse rules systems. http://www.w3.org/2004/12/rules-ws/paper/19, April 2005. Position Paper for the W3C Workshop on Rule Languages for Interoperability.
23. J. Warmer and A. Kleppe. Object Constraint Language 2.0. MITP Verlag, 2004.