I love it when someone solves the problem and we can all go home apparently
all our problems were solved with OntoML unless you missed it of course :) (01)
Peter
+1 610 462 5923
Practical Solutions to Data Quality (02)
-----Original Message-----
From: ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jack Ring
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2012 1:02 AM
To: Ontology Summit 2012 discussion
Cc: chris.paredis@xxxxxxxxxx; Ron_C_Williamson@xxxxxxxxxxxx; 'Bock, Conrad';
'Matthew West'; 'Victor Agroskin'
Subject: Re: [ontology-summit] INCOSE Ontology Action Group, onto SysML/UML (03)
With 700.000 to 1,000,000 people engaged in systems engineering world wide I
suggest that declaring SysML a "defacto standard" is a clear case of
premature immaculation. (04)
When the SysML project was started several years ago the systemists in the
crowd urged that a formal semiotic base be established that acknowledged
more than state-determined systems and prescient design. The group decided
that such a bold step would threaten the then popular SE tools such as CORE,
Cradle, etc. so they agreed to pursue just a "next generation" of the
existing situation. Now that SysML, as evolved from that knowledge base, is
clearly insufficient for modeling context sensitive, autopoietic and
autocatalytic systems let alone cybersecure systems it is rather
short-sighted to recommend evolving SysML. Adopting the beacon of
procedural programming and prescient design as your navigation aid is not
likely to be sufficient, either. (05)
The SysML tribe is not going to be successful in pasting security and
autonomy considerations on to a SysML that can accommodate > 300 designers
in one project, particularly when inevitably a composite of more than a
dozen heterogeneous viewpoints. (06)
Now that a reasonable amount of experience has been gained with the
prototype, Throw it away and give your new knowledge free range. (07)
There are goals and there are stretch goals. A Goal is agreed necessary and
the participants have reasonable confidence they know how to achieve it. A
Stretch Goal is one that the participants have no good idea how to achieve
it but, agreeing is is necessary, commit to pursuit. Because societal needs
for higher order systems continues to increase but the systems community has
not been responsive for about 15 years it is clearly time for committing to
a stretch goal. (08)
Suggest we all consider Anatoly's idea more fully. (09)
Jack Ring (010)
On Feb 23, 2012, at 8:30 PM, henson graves wrote: (011)
> Dear Anatoly,
> As I understand it you suggesting is that given the deficiencies of the
UML
> family languages regarding scaling to business eco-systems one should
start
> over. I have to disagree with you; the disagreement is pragmatic.
> What I see is that UML and SysML while needing improvement have become
> defacto standards in many engineering domains. This family of languages is
> slowly getting a formal semantics, they have good tool support, and they
are
> being used on a wide scale. Further, OMG the keeper of these language
> specifications recognizes that the standards need improvement and are
> beginning to recognize that the languages need a formal semantics. There
are
> several RFPs from OMG related to this. One of them is called something
like
> a" precise semantics for composite structure"
> The difficulty with scaling to eco-systems is not in my opinion a language
> of UML or any other language; is a system engineering methodology defect.
> One has to develop and enforce some common terminology (ontology?) and
some
> interoperability standards to expect to get consistent integrated
> architecture. this commonality currently exists in the CAD world and many
> multinational companies collaborate. Developing some commonality at least
> where things interface can work for use of UML in an eco-system. The lack
of
> this kind of hygiene is also responsible for even small projects failing. (012)
>
> Regards
> - Henson
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Anatoly Levenchuk [mailto:ailev@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2012 2:45 PM
> To: 'Bock, Conrad'; 'henson graves'; chris.paredis@xxxxxxxxxx; 'David
> Price'; 'Fredrick A Steiner'; 'Victor Agroskin';
> Ron_C_Williamson@xxxxxxxxxxxx; 'David Leal'
> Cc: Matthew West
> Subject: RE: INCOSE Ontology Action Group, onto SysML/UML
>
> Conrad,
> Thank you for pointing me to the right links for your works.
>
> I appreciate your ideas about adding ontology to product, behavior and
> project descriptions languages, especially architecture languages.
>
> I know that UML 2 and MOF are a big leap to formal semantics in MDA world.
> But for me this is not enough to enable UML family languages scaling to
> business eco-systems (beyond one enterprise). What is an object in one
> project appears as an attribute in another and vice versa (lessons learned
> from work of EPISTLE consortium). There was extended discussion in ISO
15926
> community that build on EPISTLE experience.
>
> I carefully see development of ArchiMate as a very successful
fact-oriented
> architectural language. There are no attributes in ArchiMate, and still
they
> have no formal semantics. Sure, they have almost no ontology features. I
> think that eventually they will have 1) formal semantics, will add 2)
> ontology features (the two things that you provided with UML and OPML) and
> continue be 3) fact-oriented. I am wonder how many years 1) and 2) will
take
> (I guess no less that this was taken by UML).
>
> Personally I try to use ISO 15926 as an engineering ontology, but it is
not
> a language because has no good notations. My team is thinking about
language
> workbench (http://www.languageworkbenches.net) supporting multiple
> engineering DSL on a base of ISO 15926 representation of
system-of-interest,
> systems in operational environment and enabling systems. Sure, most of
this
> DSL will be established languages for specialty engineering but we still
> need a good architectural language. Your work on OPML give us inspiration
to
> continue think about fact-oriented variant of such a language with strong
> ontology flavor and still usable by engineers.
>
> Best regards,
> Anatoly
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Bock, Conrad [mailto:conrad.bock@xxxxxxxx]
>> Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2012 12:46 AM
>> To: Anatoly Levenchuk; 'henson graves'; chris.paredis@xxxxxxxxxx;
>> 'David Price'; 'Fredrick A Steiner'; 'Victor Agroskin';
>> Ron_C_Williamson@xxxxxxxxxxxx; 'David Leal'
>> Subject: RE: INCOSE Ontology Action Group, onto SysML/UML
>>
>> Anatoly,
>>
>>> Conrad Bock at al. had papers where they urge for "more ontology
>>> in product modeling languages" and suggest alternatives like OPML
>>> (Ontological Product Modeling Language, >
>> http://www.cesames.net/fichier.php?id=370) that go beyond UML while
>>> still not fact-oriented.
>>
>> Thanks for referring to this, but the link goes to a paper that
>> should
> not be
>> distributed (see its header), are you able to take it down? The
> distributable
>> paper is at
>> http://www.nist.gov/manuscript-publication-search.cfm?pub_id=822748
>> and slides at
>> http://conradbock.org/ontological-product-modeling-short-slides.pdf
>>
>>> We found that SysML is not as good to be a basement of overall
>> MBSE > initiative. We consider many other alternatives that more
>> fond of > ontology.
>>
>> UML 2 introduced significant logical interpretations that are carried
> over to
>> SysML. The above paper uses UML. A similar paper on onto behavior
>> modeling also uses UML (http://dx.doi.org/10.5381/jot.2011.10.1.a3).
>>
>> Conrad
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
> Subscribe/Config:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/
> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2012/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2012 (013)
> Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ (014)
_________________________________________________________________
Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/ (015)
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2012/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2012
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ (016)
_________________________________________________________________
Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2012/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2012
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ (017)
|