That is the most recent version of that document. I would just warn you
that it was really done for SOX - XSDL has some infelicities not reflected
there.
Matthew
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kanaskie, Kurt A (Kurt) [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Friday, March 16, 2001 11:55 AM
> To: Fuchs, Matthew; 'Jim Clark'; Welsh, David
> Cc: Race Bannon; 'Bob Haugen'; '[email protected]';
> 'ebXML-CCBP-Analysis (E-mail)'
> Subject: RE: XMI reality check
>
>
> Matthew,
>
> Hah! When I dug up the document I noticed you are a
> co-author. My apologies,
> my reference was off the top of my head. More correctly it is:
> UML for XML Schema Mapping Specification
> 12/08/99
> Grady Booch (Rational Software Corp.)
> Magnus Christerson (Rational Software Corp.)
> Matthew Fuchs (CommerceOne Inc.)
> Jari Koistinen (CommerceOne Inc.)
>
> There may be a more recent version, but this is what we worked from.
> Regards,
> ________________________________________________________________
> Kurt Kanaskie
> Lucent Technologies
> [email protected]
> (610) 712-3096
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Fuchs, Matthew [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Friday, March 16, 2001 1:55 PM
> To: Kanaskie, Kurt A (Kurt); 'Jim Clark'; Welsh, David
> Cc: Race Bannon; 'Bob Haugen'; '[email protected]';
> 'ebXML-CCBP-Analysis (E-mail)'
> Subject: RE: XMI reality check
>
> Which "Booch's meta-model for XML Schema" are you refering to?
>
> Matthew Fuchs
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Kanaskie, Kurt A (Kurt) [mailto:[email protected]]
> > Sent: Friday, March 16, 2001 10:26 AM
> > To: 'Jim Clark'; Welsh, David
> > Cc: Race Bannon; 'Bob Haugen'; '[email protected]';
> > 'ebXML-CCBP-Analysis (E-mail)'
> > Subject: RE: XMI reality check
> >
> >
> > All,
> >
> > I have had some experience with XMI (Unisys's plug in for
> > Rational and IBM's
> > XMI toolkit). I agree XMI is ugly but it was intended for
> > machine to machine
> > exchange of models, not human readability. I have found IBM's
> > version to be
> > more complete that Unisys's for what I was trying to do.
> > IBM's toolkit was
> > also better at preserving the model graphics when imported.
> >
> > I successfully used XSLT on the XMI from a UML model, based
> on Booch's
> > meta-model for XML Schema, to generate a human readable XML
> DTD. This
> > approach is being finalized by OAG as their method of
> > generating DTDs from a
> > UML model of all of their BODs (170+). Thus I believe that
> > XMI can be used
> > to generate XML instances of business processes modeled in
> > UML. However,
> > this approach will require some consistency changes to the
> > UML version of
> > the Spec Schema.
> >
> > Another benefit of XMI is to generate meta-model instance
> > DTDs that can be
> > used to check model instance UML models. The stock tools to
> > generate these
> > DTDs are also quite ugly and not human friendly, but serve
> > the purpose.
> >
> > Regards,
> > ________________________________________________________________
> > Kurt Kanaskie
> > Lucent Technologies
> > [email protected]
> > (610) 712-3096
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jim Clark [mailto:[email protected]]
> > Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2001 12:38 PM
> > To: Welsh, David
> > Cc: Race Bannon; 'Bob Haugen'; '[email protected]';
> > 'ebXML-CCBP-Analysis (E-mail)'
> > Subject: Re: XMI reality check
> >
> > << File: Card for Jim Clark >> Yes. One could generate a DTD or XML
> > document or XMLschema from a model stored
> > as RDF.
> >
> > Jim
> >
> > "Welsh, David" wrote:
> >
> > > I've heard very good longer term experience story's about
> > using RDF from
> > the
> > > publishing/library world, and I couldn't miss the almost
> > religious sermons
> > > from some @ the W3C on RDF as the way of the future Semantic Web.
> > > It would appear RDF offers the opportunity to encapsulate
> > business process
> > > models, during the analysis, design and 'record for
> > posterity' stage in
> > > business process life cycles. I take it then in the grander
> > scheme of
> > things
> > > then, one could generate SpecSchema runtime XML from
> > business process
> > models
> > > in RDF. Sounds like it could.
> > > Dave
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Jim Clark [mailto:[email protected]]
> > > > Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2001 7:29 AM
> > > > To: Race Bannon
> > > > Cc: 'Bob Haugen'; '[email protected]';
> > 'ebXML-CCBP-Analysis
> > > > (E-mail)'
> > > > Subject: Re: XMI reality check
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I FULLY concur with Mr Bannon and vote for that format.
> > > >
> > > > Jim Clark
> > > > e2open
> > > > 936.264.3366
> > > >
> > > > Race Bannon wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > My vote: RDF is the better format.
> > > > >
> > > > > Race Bannon, Ph.D.
> > > > > Director of Training and Documentation
> > > > > Information Architects
> > > > > 4064 Colony Road
> > > > > Charlotte, NC 28211
> > > > > Ph: 704/367-2105
> > > > > Fx: 704/442-0693
> > > > > Toll Free: 877/INFOARC x. 2105
> > > > > iA: http://www.ia.com
> > > > > iA Education: http://www.ia.com/ia/training/index.htm
> > > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Bob Haugen [mailto:[email protected]]
> > > > > Sent: Friday, March 16, 2001 8:46 AM
> > > > > To: '[email protected]'; 'ebXML-CCBP-Analysis
> (E-mail)'
> > > > > Subject: XMI reality check
> > > > >
> > > > > One of the issues for the Business Process Editor has been
> > > > > what format to use to store business process models for
> > > > > interoperability with UML tools. I am also encountering
> > > > > this same issue in other projects.
> > > > >
> > > > > XMI seems to be the "standard", but I have also heard
> > > > > lots of complaints.
> > > > >
> > > > > This is a general call for feedback on XMI, from people
> > > > > who have tried it:
> > > > > * What UML tools have you tried XMI with?
> > > > > * Have you tried to take the same XMI model and
> > > > > move it from one tool to another?
> > > > > * What problems did you encounter?
> > > > > * Were XMI models imported into a UML tool
> > > > > really ugly, even if they might have worked
> > > > > technically?
> > > > > * Any other XMI comments...
> > > > > * What's a better format, if any? (RDF?)
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks a million,
> > > > > Bob Haugen
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > To unsubscribe from this elist send a message with the
> > single word
> > > > > "unsubscribe" in the body to: [email protected]
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > To unsubscribe from this elist send a message with the
> > single word
> > > > > "unsubscribe" in the body to: [email protected]
> > > >
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe from this elist send a message with the single word
> > "unsubscribe" in the body to: [email protected]
> >
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this elist send a message with the single word
> "unsubscribe" in the body to: [email protected]
>
