[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Picking the Tools
- From: Uche Ogbuji <email@example.com>
- To: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 13:25:54 -0600 (MDT)
> Ok. Both you and Uche make the same point: UML
> is an object modeling methodology. I agree that
> XML documents are not object-oriented programs. I know we've
> been round this thread before, but I wanted to
> check the expert opinions. Berners-Lee comments
> in the SciAm article that a universal system
> is needed.
> So what do we have for concept modeling above the
> level of RDF or Topic Maps? Or is it the case
> one has to commit to one of these?
Unfortunately, I think we're stuck in a crease here. UML is not
expressive enough to model whatever we'd want to in XML/RDF/TM, etc., but
it does have mature tools and strong adoption.
XML Schemas, RDF and TM are, at the low-level, what we want, but I
quite understand that not too many people would want to do all their
modeling directly in these tools the way things now stand. (People such
as Jonathan and I are exceptions, and probably weird).
So understandably you ask whether one should just use UML and therefrom
generate the appropriate low-level formats. I point out that UML is not
expressive enough, that mechanical conversion from UML in any case would
tend to poor results, and that hands-on conversion would be as much effort
as just doing the modeling in the low-level formats to begin with.
I don't think there's any good answer to this quandry right now. The
tools still need evolving.
Luckily, I think that despite the excessive hype, the Web services
movement might be exactly what is needed to push the evolution of tools
Uche Ogbuji Principal Consultant
email@example.com +1 303 583 9900 x 101
Fourthought, Inc. http://Fourthought.com
4735 East Walnut St, Ste. C, Boulder, CO 80301-2537, USA
Software-engineering, knowledge-management, XML, CORBA, Linux, Python