User Tools
ws2_thursday_06_october
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
|
ws2_thursday_06_october [2011/10/13 12:41] mikehypercube created |
ws2_thursday_06_october [2011/10/13 12:51] (current) mikehypercube Overview of current open issues. |
||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| - | ====== WS2 Session Notes 05 October ====== | + | ====== WS2 Session Notes 06 October ====== |
| Back to [[start]] | Back to [[start]] | ||
| - | To follow. | + | Back to [[Technical Modeling Framework]] |
| + | |||
| + | This week we looked at what is the optimum way to model the new and existing metadata constructs as OWL Annotation Properties. | ||
| + | |||
| + | We had previously concluded we will use the UML base class of Association Class to render these. | ||
| + | |||
| + | On further investigation, there are still questions about how to implement this in the EA model repository. In particular, for Archetypes, how do we show the relationship between the class (which has an archetype) and the archetype of which it is one. For instance, "has archetype" relationship, rendered in OWL Annotation Property. Meanwhile, if the range of such relationships is "the Archetype", that's just a class which is already ancestral to that class, e.g. "Contract". Does this need to have an "is acrhetype" relationship, and if so, to what? | ||
| + | |||
| + | These are open questions to discuss at our 13 October session. | ||
ws2_thursday_06_october.txt · Last modified: 2011/10/13 12:51 by mikehypercube
Except where otherwise noted, content on this wiki is licensed under the following license: CC Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 4.0 International
