search

ISO-TC211 / StandardsTracker

This GitHub repository lets you - our users - log and track issues that you find with our standards and other document. Tag the issue with the standard or standards effected; we will assign it to the relevant group(s) within TC 211.
11 stars 0 forks source link

General concern from AHG06 eGovernment regarding conceptual schema languages #440

Open JanHjelmager opened 2 years ago

JanHjelmager commented 2 years ago

Is this standard (or profile of UML) too geospatial to be used in eGovernment? Should we include OWL as an alternative language to UML? Consider: Information technology — Object Management Group Unified Architecture Framework (OMG UAF) — Part 1: Domain Metamodel (DMM) Information technology — Object Management Group Unified Architecture Framework (OMG UAF) —Part 2: Unified Architecture Framework Profile (UAFP)

Consider including OWL as a CSL in a longer timeframe. Shall all models originating from ISO/TC211 be modelled in UML?

A way to bridge UML with OWL ontologies could be the use of tagged values in UML. Consider providing an OWL profile of GFM, or at least a profile of the GMF that enables realization in OWL and GML/XML.

Can GFM be looked upon as a top-level ontology (e.g. ISO 21838-1)?

heidivanparys commented 2 years ago

Is this standard (or profile of UML) too geospatial to be used in eGovernment? Should we include OWL as an alternative language to UML?

The scope of 19103(:2015) is:

This International Standard provides rules and guidelines for the use of a conceptual schema language within the context of geographic information. The chosen conceptual schema language is the Unified Modeling Language (UML).

This International Standard provides a profile of the Unified Modelling Language (UML).

The standardization target type of this standard is UML schemas describing geographic information.

In order words, this standard is about using UML,. Concerns regarding whether other CLSs should be used should be addressed on a higher level (WG1, TC 211). That was also the result of the discussion in WG 1 on 2022-05-09 regarding OWL and top ontologies.

Consider: Information technology — Object Management Group Unified Architecture Framework (OMG UAF) — Part 1: Domain Metamodel (DMM) Information technology — Object Management Group Unified Architecture Framework (OMG UAF) —Part 2: Unified Architecture Framework Profile (UAFP)

This is related to #412 and https://github.com/ISO-TC211/ISO19103/issues/28.

This has been discussed in 19103, see the related issues for more info, but in short: these standards were considered not to be relevant for ISO 19103.

Given the above, I would like to suggest the following: