From golux at comcast.net  Fri Apr  2 04:59:53 2004
From: golux at comcast.net (Stephen Waterbury)
Date: Fri Apr  2 04:36:51 2004
Subject: [step-os] Testing!
Message-ID: <406D3999.2040302@comcast.net>

Hi David and Lothar,

Did you notice any weirdness when subscribing?
I think the configuration wasn't quite right when
I sent out the invitations, but it should be okay
now.  (Guess I should have tested a little more ... :)

Cheers,
Steve
From david.price at eurostep.com  Fri Apr  2 05:06:15 2004
From: david.price at eurostep.com (David Price)
Date: Fri Apr  2 05:10:27 2004
Subject: [step-os] Testing!
In-Reply-To: <406D3999.2040302@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <000701c4189a$228fdbe0$2101a8c0@esukpc20>

I received this test.

The subscription email subject was weird though: 

confirm 040d1771697f46f41eabe5cdd2dda3742c72fa74

DP

> -----Original Message-----
> From: step-os-bounces@ned.gsfc.nasa.gov [mailto:step-os-
> bounces@ned.gsfc.nasa.gov] On Behalf Of Stephen Waterbury
> Sent: 02 April 2004 11:00
> To: step-os@ned.gsfc.nasa.gov
> Subject: [step-os] Testing!
> 
> Hi David and Lothar,
> 
> Did you notice any weirdness when subscribing?
> I think the configuration wasn't quite right when
> I sent out the invitations, but it should be okay
> now.  (Guess I should have tested a little more ... :)
> 
> Cheers,
> Steve
> _______________________________________________
> step-os mailing list
> step-os@step.nasa.gov
> http://ned.gsfc.nasa.gov/mailman/listinfo/step-os

From golux at comcast.net  Fri Apr  2 05:37:50 2004
From: golux at comcast.net (Stephen Waterbury)
Date: Fri Apr  2 05:14:45 2004
Subject: [step-os] Testing!
In-Reply-To: <000701c4189a$228fdbe0$2101a8c0@esukpc20>
References: <000701c4189a$228fdbe0$2101a8c0@esukpc20>
Message-ID: <406D427E.4070005@comcast.net>

David Price wrote:
> I received this test.
> 
> The subscription email subject was weird though: 
> 
> confirm 040d1771697f46f41eabe5cdd2dda3742c72fa74

That's normal for a Mailman list.
That's so you can just send a blank reply from
most clients because they'll leave the cookie
in the subject line.
From lothar.klein at lksoft.com  Fri Apr  2 06:21:17 2004
From: lothar.klein at lksoft.com (Lothar Klein)
Date: Fri Apr  2 05:54:25 2004
Subject: [step-os] Testing!
In-Reply-To: <406D3999.2040302@comcast.net>
References: <406D3999.2040302@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <87152770422.20040402132117@lksoft.com>

Steve,

For me all went well - I had no problems

Lothar


-- 
// Lothar Klein, LKSoftWare GmbH
// Steinweg 1, 36093 Kuenzell, Germany
// +49 661 933933-0, Fax: -2
// mailto:lothar.klein@lksoft.com   http://www.lksoft.com

Friday, April 2, 2004, 11:59:53 AM, you wrote:
> Hi David and Lothar,

> Did you notice any weirdness when subscribing?
> I think the configuration wasn't quite right when
> I sent out the invitations, but it should be okay
> now.  (Guess I should have tested a little more ... :)

> Cheers,
> Steve
> _______________________________________________
> step-os mailing list
> step-os@step.nasa.gov
> http://ned.gsfc.nasa.gov/mailman/listinfo/step-os

From david.price at eurostep.com  Fri Apr  2 08:26:47 2004
From: david.price at eurostep.com (David Price)
Date: Fri Apr  2 07:59:54 2004
Subject: [step-os] Testing!
In-Reply-To: <87152770422.20040402132117@lksoft.com>
Message-ID: <001601c418b6$262044e0$2101a8c0@esukpc20>

Steve,

So, is this ready for me to tell my colleagues about? OR... should I await a
broadcast on the usual exploders before telling them?

Cheers (and again.. THANKS!),
David

> -----Original Message-----
> From: step-os-bounces@ned.gsfc.nasa.gov [mailto:step-os-
> bounces@ned.gsfc.nasa.gov] On Behalf Of Lothar Klein
> Sent: 02 April 2004 12:21
> To: Stephen Waterbury
> Cc: step-os@ned.gsfc.nasa.gov
> Subject: Re: [step-os] Testing!
> 
> Steve,
> 
> For me all went well - I had no problems
> 
> Lothar
> 
> 
> --
> // Lothar Klein, LKSoftWare GmbH
> // Steinweg 1, 36093 Kuenzell, Germany
> // +49 661 933933-0, Fax: -2
> // mailto:lothar.klein@lksoft.com   http://www.lksoft.com
> 
> Friday, April 2, 2004, 11:59:53 AM, you wrote:
> > Hi David and Lothar,
> 
> > Did you notice any weirdness when subscribing?
> > I think the configuration wasn't quite right when
> > I sent out the invitations, but it should be okay
> > now.  (Guess I should have tested a little more ... :)
> 
> > Cheers,
> > Steve
> > _______________________________________________
> > step-os mailing list
> > step-os@step.nasa.gov
> > http://ned.gsfc.nasa.gov/mailman/listinfo/step-os
> 
> _______________________________________________
> step-os mailing list
> step-os@step.nasa.gov
> http://ned.gsfc.nasa.gov/mailman/listinfo/step-os


From golux at comcast.net  Sun Apr  4 15:15:06 2004
From: golux at comcast.net (Stephen Waterbury)
Date: Sun Apr  4 14:51:52 2004
Subject: [step-os] Testing!
In-Reply-To: <406DA500.5040304@comcast.net>
References: <001601c418b6$262044e0$2101a8c0@esukpc20>
	<406DA500.5040304@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <40705EBA.3050008@comcast.net>

David Price wrote:

> So, is this ready for me to tell my colleagues about? OR... should I await a
> broadcast on the usual exploders before telling them?

Absolutely!  Go ahead and tell your colleagues about it.
I will announce it on the PDES, Inc. lists, but I
wasn't planning to announce it elsewhere.  However,
you should feel free to announce it on other lists that
you think should know about it.

Cheers,
Steve
From golux at comcast.net  Mon Apr  5 18:55:36 2004
From: golux at comcast.net (Stephen C. Waterbury)
Date: Mon Apr  5 18:28:13 2004
Subject: [step-os] And the kick-off:  STEP and ontologies
Message-ID: <4071E3E8.3@comcast.net>

Greetings, fellow STEP-OSers!

Judging by our membership (which you can see if you go
to http://step.nasa.gov/mailman/listinfo/step-os and enter
your address and password), I think we have a quorum.
Also, all messages to this list go into our archive:
http://www.step.nasa.gov/pipermail/step-os ... so late-comers
will have access to our discussion history, anyway. ;)

I'm kicking things off with this message on the subject of
STEP and ontologies ... which is actually material for
several threads, so please feel free to go off on any
tangent that appeals to you.

One of my main interests in this regard is how best to integrate
STEP and STEP-based ontologies into the development and application
of the many other ontologies that are used in an enterprise.

David Price's "exPRESS for free" experiments and his paper
(see http://exff.org, and more specifically
http://homepages.nildram.co.uk/~esukpc20/exff_r01a2/docs/semweb_step.html)
have shown, among other things, that STEP AP's and instance data
can be brought into the Semantic Web representational idiom
(OWL, for example).

Also, one of David's presentations at the recent ISO SC4
meeting, "Building a Bridge from STEP-land", lays out many
of the issues I'd like to discuss here.  [David, are you okay
with making those slides either public or at least accessible
to members of this list?  Perhaps on the exff site?  Or send
it to me with your Wiki material ... hint, hint!]

So here are some questions that naturally arise (this is not
an exhaustive list -- please add to and comment on it!):

(1) Would it be useful to define some "recommended practices" for
doing (e.g.) STEP -> UML, STEP -> OWL, etc. transformations?
(I think so.)  If so, I propose to use this forum to discuss
the development, prototyping, and testing of them.

(2) Would it be useful to define some "high-level interfaces" for
STEP-aware applications to use in interacting with STEP data?
EuroSTEP -- and specifically, Ian Bailey :) -- has already done
work in this area, which I think is a critical piece of the
architecture needed to put access to STEP technology into the
hands of enterprise developers.  Again, I think the prototyping,
testing, and validation of these interfaces could be a very
appropriate activity for this forum.

(3) Finally, I'd like to look at providing the developers
of enterprise ontologies (which are proliferating like rabbits
these days ;) with methods and tools to discover, integrate with,
leverage, and avoid duplicating (!) STEP-based ontologies -- by
which I mean to include both "canonically derived" ones in (1)
and the possibly more "adapted" ones of (2).  Of course, this
issue is not unique to STEP, so there may be both COTS and
open-source solutions out there, but the ones I've seen seem
to be relatively primitive.

Cheers,
Steve

From lubell at nist.gov  Tue Apr  6 13:13:54 2004
From: lubell at nist.gov (Joshua Lubell)
Date: Tue Apr  6 12:45:56 2004
Subject: [step-os] pyExpress
Message-ID: <4072E552.7060003@nist.gov>

Can somebody tell me the status of pyExpress, Hans Peter de Koning's 
Python EXPRESS tool? This was presented a year ago at the NASA-ESA 
Workshop on Aerospace Product Data Exchange, but a Google search on 
"pyexpress" yields little more than the PowerPoint slides presented at 
said workshop.

The workshop presentation mentioned that pyExpress would eventually be 
published as open source.

Thank you,
Josh

-- 
Josh Lubell
National Institute of Standards and Technology
Manufacturing Systems Integration Division
100 Bureau Drive, Stop 8263
Gaithersburg MD 20899-8263, USA
Phone: 1-301-975-3563, Email: lubell@nist.gov

From Hans-Peter.de.Koning at esa.int  Wed Apr  7 09:00:16 2004
From: Hans-Peter.de.Koning at esa.int (Hans-Peter.de.Koning@esa.int)
Date: Wed Apr  7 08:32:52 2004
Subject: [step-os] pyExpress
Message-ID: <OF8BE62F31.2E0C3F1B-ONC1256E6F.0044F079-C1256E6F.00477088@estec.esa.int>

Joshua,

I am also on this list (since Monday) so I'm probably the person to answer 
your question. Indeed pyExpress has not been published yet, because we are 
still waiting for a suitable formal ESA open source license.

We have made considerable progress though, and I will report on this at 
the upcoming NASA-ESA Workshop on Product Data Exchange (at EADS/Astrium, 
Friedrichshafen, Germany, 20-23 April 2004, see 
www.estec.esa.int/conferences for details). The abstract for the 
presentation summarizes the status:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Abstract 6th NASA-ESA Workshop on Product Data Exchange
"Developments with pyExpress - an open source Python binding"
Hans Peter de Koning, ESA/ESTEC, Noordwijk, The Netherlands

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

pyExpress is a development by the European Space Agency (ESA) to create an 
open source software (OSS) toolkit for the efficient development and 
verification of ISO 10303 (STEP) based product data exchange protocols. It 
has the following objectives:

- lower the threshold for implementation of STEP standards as much as 
possible; 

- ensure the availability of data exchange solutions in the long term; 

- avoid any dependency on third party run-time licenses; 

- ensure full portability across all computer platforms / compiler 
combinations used for (space) analysis tools; 

- provide an OSS environment for STEP which is comparable in power and 
effectiveness with XML OSS environments. 

pyExpress was started as an internal project at ESTEC in October 2002. It 
can now generate an efficient, early-binding Python class library from 
most EXPRESS (ISO 10303-11 edition 1) schemas. In conjunction with the 
module pyExpressLib.py it provides an easy to use API for the 
implementation of STEP data import and export interfaces. It contains 
complete reader and writer modules for ISO 10103-21 text encoding (a.k.a. 
'Part 21 File' or 'STEP Physical File'). The API is an early-binding 
mapping of Python classes on EXPRESS ENTITYs and TYPEs. Because Python 
maps very well onto EXPRESS and also has a very elegant syntax as well as 
extremely powerful object-oriented reflection and text processing 
functionality, this leads to a very natural, easy-to-use programming 
interface. In order to support developers of data exchange interfaces who 
prefer using C++, also a C++ API generator in the form of an early-binding 
ANSI C++ class library has been implemented. This functionality is in 
advanced prototype stage.

Recently ESA awarded a contract to the Computer Science Department of the 
University of Manchester (UoM) in the UK to merge the best of pyExpress 
with the UoM's Jex Java/EXPRESS toolsuite to create a very robust OSS 
EXPRESS Software Development Kit.

pyExpress has not yet been published on the web, pending the completion of 
an approved ESA open source license. Publication is expected later in 
2004.

Furthermore we have used the Python libraries generated with pyExpress 
successfully to create TASverter, a command line tool that converts 
thermal-analysis models from/to ESARAD, THERMICA and STEP-TAS Part 21 
files. Performance is quite good and the Python language maps very well 
onto EXPRESS, giving us a high productivity in creating the mapping logic. 
Large International Space Station models get converted in about half a 
minute on an average 1Ghz PC.
Details at http://www.estec.esa.int/thermal/tools/tasverter.html

Best regards, Hans Peter

--
Hans Peter de Koning -- mailto:Hans-Peter.de.Koning@esa.int
European Space Research and Technology Centre (ESTEC)
Directorate of Technical and Quality Management
Mechanical Engineering Department
Thermal and Structures Division
Analysis and Verification Section (ESA D/TEC-MCV)
http://www.estec.esa.int/thermal/tools





Joshua Lubell <lubell@nist.gov>
Sent by: step-os-bounces@ned.gsfc.nasa.gov
2004-04-06 19:13
Please respond to STEP Open-Source

 
        To:     step-os@ned.gsfc.nasa.gov
        cc: 
        Subject:        [step-os] pyExpress


Can somebody tell me the status of pyExpress, Hans Peter de Koning's 
Python EXPRESS tool? This was presented a year ago at the NASA-ESA 
Workshop on Aerospace Product Data Exchange, but a Google search on 
"pyexpress" yields little more than the PowerPoint slides presented at 
said workshop.

The workshop presentation mentioned that pyExpress would eventually be 
published as open source.

Thank you,
Josh

-- 
Josh Lubell
National Institute of Standards and Technology
Manufacturing Systems Integration Division
100 Bureau Drive, Stop 8263
Gaithersburg MD 20899-8263, USA
Phone: 1-301-975-3563, Email: lubell@nist.gov

_______________________________________________
step-os mailing list
step-os@step.nasa.gov
http://step.nasa.gov/mailman/listinfo/step-os



From david.d.briggs at boeing.com  Wed Apr  7 13:49:19 2004
From: david.d.briggs at boeing.com (Briggs, David D)
Date: Wed Apr  7 13:23:38 2004
Subject: [step-os] Open source for data retention
Message-ID: <EF99763768F49C4DB2E2360547C7AA1C02650E81@xch-nw-05.nw.nos.boeing.com>

Hello fellow Open Source advocates,

First, thanks to Steve for setting up this mailing list. The more we
encourage a community of open source thinkers, the better.

I would like to add another flavor to the list of reasons why people are
interested in open source for product data. My focus area is the long
term retention of product data. Open formats, such as STEP, are
excellent strategies for allowing the data to remain useful independent
of the software system that created it. This independence of data is a
key approach for the long term retention of data. 

Open formats allow the data to be understood years after it is created.
Open source tools that operate on the data allow the utility of the data
to be ensured as long as the source can be executed in some future
computing environment. So my main interest in open source is the
availability of tools that add value to the data, such as viewers,
parsers, etc. Having these tools in an open source environment promises
that the tools as well as the data are preserved in a way that will
interpretable years in the future.

I look forward to many interesting discussions on this list.

David Briggs
Associate Technical Fellow
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Information Systems
P.O. Box 3707, M/S 2R-97 
Seattle, WA 98124-2207
(206)544-5310 
FAX: (206)544-5889


From Harold.P.Frisch at nasa.gov  Mon Apr 19 10:14:03 2004
From: Harold.P.Frisch at nasa.gov (Harold P. Frisch)
Date: Mon Apr 19 09:58:52 2004
Subject: [step-os] Problems in applying Protege to IDEF0,
	with an AP233 application
Message-ID: <p06020400bca9861541f8@[128.183.219.44]>

Anyone

Some help would be appreciated.

I've just made an attempt to use Protege to create an ontology based 
representation of an IDEF0 model for a model-intensive, model based 
systems engineering design process.  I wanted to use this model both 
as a USE case to bound the AP233 "Model Management" capability that 
I'm trying to define and too also define an OWL model for the complex 
set of intertwined models and model parameters used in the design 
process.  I also wanted to learn Protege via a NASA relevant problem 
that I understood.

It didn't take me long to run into a brick wall. I can't figure out 
if the wall is real STEP-SysML-OWL problem or a product of my lack of 
Protege experience.

A push over this wall would be appreciated.

The attachment defines my problem and asks 4 questions that I can't answer.

Thanks

Harry



-- 
Harry
-----------
Harold P. Frisch
Code 592
Systems Engineering Division
NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center
Greenbelt, MD 20771
(301) 286-8730 Voice
(301) 286-0612 Fax
harry.frisch@gsfc.nasa.gov
or
Harold.P.Frisch@nasa.gov

If you're rejected by NASA's SPAM filter use:
hpfrisch@pop700.gsfc.nasa.gov
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: IDEF0_protege_model.doc
Type: application/msword
Size: 119296 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://step.nasa.gov/pipermail/step-os/attachments/20040419/2e9956ba/IDEF0_protege_model-0001.doc
From Harold.P.Frisch at nasa.gov  Mon Apr 19 14:29:45 2004
From: Harold.P.Frisch at nasa.gov (Harold P. Frisch)
Date: Mon Apr 19 14:00:33 2004
Subject: [step-os] Problems in applying Protege to IDEF0,	with an
	AP233  application
In-Reply-To: <OFA1F9F89C.D670E1BA-ON85256E7B.0057C4F2-85256E7B.0059920D@mail.gm.com>
References: <OFA1F9F89C.D670E1BA-ON85256E7B.0057C4F2-85256E7B.0059920D@mail.gm.com>
Message-ID: <p06020404bca9bd9aacfa@[128.183.219.44]>

Mike

Thanks, you say it more clearly than Steve did.  I see what your 
saying.  I could never get totally comfortable with the notion of 
"class" or the reasons for the class inheritance caution flags that 
Mike D. and David O. kept waving.  Now I understand.

This is telling me that any OWL/STEP/SysML mapping for state and 
function based behavior could be non-trivial.

Maybe someone has a simple solution to this problem and that its 
resolution is already built into STEP.

I can't buy the notion that domains characterized by IDEF0 type 
activities and sub-activities are out of scope for OWL, Protege and 
ontologies.

Harry


>Hi Harry,
>
>I've not done anything with Protege, (just looked at the web pages briefly
>to get a quick confirmation of what I thought it was about), so I may be
>offbase, but here goes.
>
>I think your problem is a wrong viewpoint. Classes and subclasses are not
>the same as activities and sub-activities in IDEF0. Classes have subclasses
>that are related with the concept "is a", i.e. class "Author" has
>subclasses "Columnist", "Editor", etc. (an example from the Protege web
>site). The subclasses share ALL the characteristics of the superclasses,
>and add some more (normally) to specialize the superclass. If you try to
>use subclasses for the IDEF0 sub-activities you run into a number of
>problems, since the sub-activities are not each more specialized versions
>of the entire parent activity, they are each a PART of the parent activity,
>all the sub-activities are added together to make the whole parent
>activity. Same thing happens with the ICOMs, they add together in the
>sub-levels to make composite flows at the parent level. One characteristic
>of IDEF0 diagrams is that if you want you can plot the leaf nodes all on
>one big sheet and collapse all the intermediate boxes out of the diagram
>and lose nothing. If you do that with class diagrams you lose lots because
>the inheritance from superclass to subclass carries all the common
>attributes.
>
>This is probably the same thing Steve Waterbury observed as a "class
>inheritance problem".
>
>Just my very uninformed observation, take it for what it's worth....
>
>
>---
>Mike Loeffler - Global IT Leader   | voice: +1 (248) 685-6102
>GM Electrical, Controls & Software | fax: +1 (248) 685-5154
>3300 General Motors Rd.            | mailto:michael.loeffler@gm.com
>Milford, MI 48380-3726             | Mailstop 483-340-111
>
>
> 
>                                                                                                                                        
>                       "Harold P. Frisch"
>                       <Harold.P.Frisch@nasa.        To: 
>step-os@ned.gsfc.nasa.gov                                                  
>                       gov>                          cc: 
>sfriedenthal <sanford.friedenthal@lmco.com>, Chris 
>Paredis                 
>                       Sent by: 
><chris.paredis@me.gatech.edu>, David Oliver <doliver106@cox.net>, 
>"Ives, Barry"     
>                       step-os-bounces@ned.gs         <bives@isr.us>, 
>jskipper@vitechcorp.com, Michael Dickerson <simimike@earthlink.net> 
>                       fc.nasa.gov                   Subject: 
>[step-os] Problems in applying Protege to IDEF0,      with an 
>AP233        
> 
>application                                                                         
> 
>                                                                                                                                        
>                       04/19/2004 10:14 
>AM                                                                                                
>                       Please respond to 
>STEP                                                                                             
> 
>Open-Source                                                                                                        
> 
>                                                                                                                                        
> 
>                                                                                                                                        
>
>
>
>
>Anyone
>
>Some help would be appreciated.
>
>I've just made an attempt to use Protege to create an ontology based
>representation of an IDEF0 model for a model-intensive, model based
>systems engineering design process.  I wanted to use this model both
>as a USE case to bound the AP233 "Model Management" capability that
>I'm trying to define and too also define an OWL model for the complex
>set of intertwined models and model parameters used in the design
>process.  I also wanted to learn Protege via a NASA relevant problem
>that I understood.
>
>It didn't take me long to run into a brick wall. I can't figure out
>if the wall is real STEP-SysML-OWL problem or a product of my lack of
>Protege experience.
>
>A push over this wall would be appreciated.
>
>The attachment defines my problem and asks 4 questions that I can't answer.
>
>Thanks
>
>Harry
>
>
>
>--
>Harry
>-----------
>Harold P. Frisch
>Code 592
>Systems Engineering Division
>NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center
>Greenbelt, MD 20771
>(301) 286-8730 Voice
>(301) 286-0612 Fax
>harry.frisch@gsfc.nasa.gov
>or
>Harold.P.Frisch@nasa.gov
>
>If you're rejected by NASA's SPAM filter use:
>hpfrisch@pop700.gsfc.nasa.gov(See attached file: IDEF0_protege_model.doc)
>_______________________________________________
>step-os mailing list
>step-os@step.nasa.gov
>http://step.nasa.gov/mailman/listinfo/step-os
>
>
>
>
>
>Attachment converted: Macintosh HD:IDEF0_protege_model 1.doc 
>(WDBN/MSWD) (0006B8F8)


-- 
Harry
-----------
Harold P. Frisch
Code 592
Systems Engineering Division
NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center
Greenbelt, MD 20771
(301) 286-8730 Voice
(301) 286-0612 Fax
harry.frisch@gsfc.nasa.gov
or
Harold.P.Frisch@nasa.gov

If you're rejected by NASA's SPAM filter use:
hpfrisch@pop700.gsfc.nasa.gov
From golux at comcast.net  Mon Apr 19 16:35:39 2004
From: golux at comcast.net (Stephen C. Waterbury)
Date: Mon Apr 19 16:07:16 2004
Subject: [step-os] Problems in applying Protege to IDEF0,	with an	AP233
	application
In-Reply-To: <p06020404bca9bd9aacfa@[128.183.219.44]>
References: <OFA1F9F89C.D670E1BA-ON85256E7B.0057C4F2-85256E7B.0059920D@mail.gm.com>
	<p06020404bca9bd9aacfa@[128.183.219.44]>
Message-ID: <4084381B.6050505@comcast.net>

Harold P. Frisch wrote:

> This is telling me that any OWL/STEP/SysML mapping for state and 
> function based behavior could be non-trivial.
> 
> Maybe someone has a simple solution to this problem and that its 
> resolution is already built into STEP.

As you know, state and function are extremely general concepts
that are represented with various flavors in various domains ...
any useful unified representation will need to prove that it can
be mapped to at least the most important domain-specific
representations.  I would *not* expect that to be non-trivial,
and I doubt that anyone has a "simple" solution, although there
are probably pieces of a solution available.  I'd be surprised
if the representation for them is even uniform *within* STEP --
for example, AP210 has a model for function that I doubt any
other AP is aware of, and I'd be surprised if no other AP has
one.

> I can't buy the notion that domains characterized by IDEF0 type 
> activities and sub-activities are out of scope for OWL, Protege and 
> ontologies.

Ontologies and processes are two different things, and there
are different kinds of tools that are best adapted to modeling
them.

No *ontology* domain is out of scope for Protege.  You can use
Protege to model an ontology for processes -- meaning you can
use it to define the types of objects that are used in IDEF0
("process", "input", "output", etc.) and their properties and
relationships.

However, Protege is not suited to modeling how processes actually
work -- that's what IDEF0 is (one of the methodologies) for.
IDEF0 tools already have the IDEF0 ontology built into them,
so they give you a "palette" with the IDEF0 classes -- process,
input, output, etc.

The difference is similar to the relationship between an EXPRESS
modeling tool and a CAD tool.  You can use the EXPRESS modeling tool
to develop a model of the information that the CAD tool produces, but
you wouldn't use an EXPRESS tool to do CAD modeling -- you use a
CAD tool for that.  :)

One more note:  although an ontology tool like Protege is not useful
for modeling processes, that doesn't mean you can't use OWL to
exchange IDEF0 models.  OWL is very flexible in what it can
represent, so you could use it to represent both an ontology and
a set of instance data -- so for example you could put the IDEF0
ontology *and* an IDEF0 process model both into an OWL file.

Mike wrote:
>> [Mike's nice explanation omitted for brevity ...]
>> This is probably the same thing Steve Waterbury observed as a "class
>> inheritance problem".

Yes, exactly.  More generally, the process/subprocess relationship is
quite different from the class/subclass relationship.  Which is why I
kind of cringed when you told me what you were going to attempt.  ;)

Cheers,
Steve


From golux at comcast.net  Mon Apr 19 17:06:00 2004
From: golux at comcast.net (Stephen C. Waterbury)
Date: Mon Apr 19 17:10:17 2004
Subject: [step-os] Problems in applying Protege to IDEF0,	with an	AP233
	application
In-Reply-To: <4084381B.6050505@comcast.net>
References: <OFA1F9F89C.D670E1BA-ON85256E7B.0057C4F2-85256E7B.0059920D@mail.gm.com>	<p06020404bca9bd9aacfa@[128.183.219.44]>
	<4084381B.6050505@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <40843F38.5000707@comcast.net>

Stephen C. Waterbury wrote:

> Ontologies and processes are two different things, and there
> are different kinds of tools that are best adapted to modeling
> them.

Just to make sure this horse is really dead ... :) ...

With tools, the main issue is *visualization*.  So that
summarizes the difference between Protege and IDEF0 tools:

Protege lets you visualize an ontology (mainly, its class
hierarchy and definitions).

IDEF0 tools let you visualize a process.

From Harold.P.Frisch at nasa.gov  Mon Apr 19 20:11:16 2004
From: Harold.P.Frisch at nasa.gov (Harold P. Frisch)
Date: Mon Apr 19 20:32:03 2004
Subject: [step-os] Problems in applying Protege to IDEF0,
	with an AP233 application
Message-ID: <1082419875.40846aa42a3bd@webpop.gsfc.nasa.gov>

Steve

We fail to have a common view of visualization and ontology.  I looked at
Protege and expected that it would help me visualize the activity hierarchy of
the process and precisely define the data flows within the process. I expected
to be able to define the semantics that defined the sub-activities within an
activity breakdown and the semantics that defined sub-activity inputs,
controls, mechanisms and outputs.

For the last 40 years I've observed ill-defined activities with ill-defined
data flows in a multi-disciplinary design environment with harmonization and
common agreement achieved by chance encounter in the cafeteria.  

I was hoping that Protege and this ontology stuff would allow activity
breakdowns and essential data flows to be well defined.

Yes ontologies and processes are two different things; however, processes have
semantics.  I was hoping that a process ontology would enable one to:

o obtain an explicit description of the process (concepts, properties and
attributes of concepts, constraints on properties and attributes)
o obtain a common vocabulary and shared understanding
o obtain a definition of process terms and relations among them
o arrange the concept is a hierarchy (activity, sub-activity)
o define properties that an activity or sub-activity can have
o share a common understanding of process information
o enable reuse of process domain knowledge
o make process assumptions explicit

List stolen from slides 4-9 in "Ontology Engineering for the Semantic Web and
Beyond" by Natalya F. Noy Stanford University and adapted to the process
ontology problem.

Sorry 

The old horse ain't dead yet.

Harry

Quoting "Stephen C. Waterbury" <golux@comcast.net>:

> Stephen C. Waterbury wrote:
> 
> > Ontologies and processes are two different things, and there
> > are different kinds of tools that are best adapted to modeling
> > them.
> 
> Just to make sure this horse is really dead ... :) ...
> 
> With tools, the main issue is *visualization*.  So that
> summarizes the difference between Protege and IDEF0 tools:
> 
> Protege lets you visualize an ontology (mainly, its class
> hierarchy and definitions).
> 
> IDEF0 tools let you visualize a process.

Actually I like to read the definitions of the arrows and boxes so that I can
visualize the process ontology.  The display is of secondary interest to me.

> 
> _______________________________________________
> step-os mailing list
> step-os@step.nasa.gov
> http://step.nasa.gov/mailman/listinfo/step-os
> 


Harry

From golux at comcast.net  Mon Apr 19 22:40:25 2004
From: golux at comcast.net (Stephen Waterbury)
Date: Mon Apr 19 22:18:18 2004
Subject: [step-os] Problems in applying Protege to IDEF0, with an AP233
	application
In-Reply-To: <1082419875.40846aa42a3bd@webpop.gsfc.nasa.gov>
References: <1082419875.40846aa42a3bd@webpop.gsfc.nasa.gov>
Message-ID: <40848D99.4020805@comcast.net>

Before I answer Harry, let me invite all those whom he has cc'ed to
join the "STEP Open-Source" list (step-os) if you are interested
in discussions of STEP-related open-source and open-architecture
issues.  The list is open to the public, so all you have to do to
subscribe is go to

http://step.nasa.gov/mailman/listinfo/step-os

Then we won't have to keep cc'ing you.  :)

Harold P. Frisch wrote:

> We fail to have a common view of visualization and ontology.  I looked at
> Protege and expected that it would help me visualize the activity hierarchy of
> the process and precisely define the data flows within the process. I expected
> to be able to define the semantics that defined the sub-activities within an
> activity breakdown and the semantics that defined sub-activity inputs,
> controls, mechanisms and outputs.

Actually, you *can* do that, but not the way you thought.  :)

> For the last 40 years I've observed ill-defined activities with ill-defined
> data flows in a multi-disciplinary design environment with harmonization and
> common agreement achieved by chance encounter in the cafeteria.  
> 
> I was hoping that Protege and this ontology stuff would allow activity
> breakdowns and essential data flows to be well defined.

Ontologies are part of the solution to that problem, just as STEP
is part of the solution for an integrated engineering environment,
but not the whole solution.

> Yes ontologies and processes are two different things; however, processes have
> semantics.

... and they have ontologies too.  No contradiction there.  :)

> I was hoping that a process ontology would enable one to: ...

Ontologies will indeed help with all the items in this list,
but that doesn't mean that ontology-definition tools (such as
Protege) are the best tools to use for *everything* related to
each item.

> o obtain an explicit description of the process (concepts, properties and
> attributes of concepts, constraints on properties and attributes)
> o obtain a common vocabulary and shared understanding
> o obtain a definition of process terms and relations among them

Protege can directly model all of these.

> o arrange the concept [in] a hierarchy (activity, sub-activity)
                                          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Ah, you're cheating Harry -- the slide actually said "subclass-superclass"
hierarchy!  And that's what it *meant*.  "activity/sub-activity" is a
completely different semantic.

An activity and a sub-activity are both *instances* of a single class:
the "activity" class.  Their relationship to each other is similar to
the relationship between parts in a STEP assembly -- in an IDEF0
tool, you can "drill down" into an activity to see the sub-activities
of which it is composed, just as you can drill down into a part in an
assembly browser to see the parts of which it is composed.  But you're
not looking at the subclasses of the assembled part -- just its
components.

In Protege, if you have define a class "activity", you might
define subclasses of activity that are specific to the NASA mission
lifecycle like

"spacecraft assembly" = SA
"instrument assembly" = IA
"vibration testing"   = VT

So our class hierarchy is just one level deep:

 NASA Mission Activity   <- class
 ---------------------
     /   |   \
    SA  IA   VT          <- subclasses

Now let's define a NASA mission life cycle process template
(or instance) -- it might be something like:

      (SA)                     <- instance of SA
      /  \
   (IA)  (VT) (+ other stuff)  <- instances of IA and VT, etc.
   /  \
 (VT) (+ other other stuff)    <- instance of VT, etc.

Notice that when an actual process or process template is defined,
instances of the same activity (class) can happen at various places
-- e.g., vibration testing (VT) is done at various levels.  (Yes, you
could define more precise subclasses of VT for these, say "Spacecraft
Vibration Testing" (SVT) and "Instrument Vibration Testing" (IVT), as
each one no doubt has unique properties, but that would prove my point
even further:  the new SVT and IVT classes would be subclasses of VT,
but their instances would be sub-*activities* of SA and IA, respectively,
so the diagrams -- and more importantly, their semantics -- would still
be different.)

Spacecraft Assembly, Instrument Assembly, and Vibration Testing
are all subclasses of the general "NASA Mission Activity" class, and
they are also sub-activities of NASA Mission Activity, but the
definition of the NASA Mission Activity process does not necessarily
assemble them (activity/sub-activity) in the same order as their
class hierarchy (class/subclass).

The *class* hierarchy (the first diagram) and the properties and
definitions associated with the classes, is what Protege is designed
to model, visualize, and define.

The *process* hierarchy (the second diagram) is what IDEF0 and other
process modeling technologies are designed to model, visualize, and
produce.

The ontology provides definitions and class relationships for
the concepts used by the process model -- as you correctly inferred
from the slides about ontologies.  However, your reading of
"subclass-superclass" as "activity, sub-activity" was not correct.

> o define properties that an activity or sub-activity can have

Yes -- this is meta-data again, which is what Protege does best.

> o share a common understanding of process information

Protege will help you define all the terms you use in defining processes,
but it is not designed to help you model process templates or instances
of processes -- process-modeling tools (such as IDEF0) and workflow
modeling tools do that.

> o enable reuse of process domain knowledge
> o make process assumptions explicit

Yep.

> List stolen from slides 4-9 in "Ontology Engineering for the Semantic Web and
> Beyond" by Natalya F. Noy Stanford University and adapted to the process
> ontology problem.

Very nice slides.

> Sorry 
> The old horse ain't dead yet.

It was not my intention to identify the horse with *you* ... ;)

Cheers,
Steve
From golux at comcast.net  Mon Apr 19 23:49:34 2004
From: golux at comcast.net (Stephen Waterbury)
Date: Mon Apr 19 23:25:19 2004
Subject: [step-os] Problems in applying Protege to IDEF0, with an AP233
	application
In-Reply-To: <1082419875.40846aa42a3bd@webpop.gsfc.nasa.gov>
References: <1082419875.40846aa42a3bd@webpop.gsfc.nasa.gov>
Message-ID: <40849DCE.8030508@comcast.net>

Harry,

I forgot to address your final remark ... see below.  :)

Harold P. Frisch wrote:

>>Stephen C. Waterbury wrote:

>>>Ontologies and processes are two different things, and there
>>>are different kinds of tools that are best adapted to modeling
>>>them.
>>
>>Just to make sure this horse is really dead ... :) ...
>>
>>With tools, the main issue is *visualization*.  So that
>>summarizes the difference between Protege and IDEF0 tools:
>>
>>Protege lets you visualize an ontology (mainly, its class
>>hierarchy and definitions).
>>
>>IDEF0 tools let you visualize a process.
> 
> Actually I like to read the definitions of the arrows and boxes so that I can
> visualize the process ontology.  The display is of secondary interest to me.

Without the tool's visualization capabilities, you
wouldn't have any arrows and boxes to read the
definitions of -- you'd just be looking at a text
(or binary) file.

My point was simply that the central visual metaphor
of a tool tells you what it has been designed to do:
with Protege, it's classes; with IDEF0, it's activities.
With Emacs or vi, it's code.  :)

A class icon in a Protege class diagram does share the
"expansion" or "drill-down" behavior of an activity box
in an IDEF0 diagram, but the meaning of the expansion
(class/subclass vs. activity/sub-activity) is different.

- Steve
From Harold.P.Frisch at nasa.gov  Tue Apr 20 07:51:04 2004
From: Harold.P.Frisch at nasa.gov (Harold P. Frisch)
Date: Tue Apr 20 07:21:45 2004
Subject: [step-os] Problems in applying Protege to IDEF0, with an
	AP233 application
In-Reply-To: <007d01c42698$319e9f20$de02470a@TQRH>
References: <007d01c42698$319e9f20$de02470a@TQRH>
Message-ID: <p06020405bcaab8460393@[128.183.219.44]>

Ralph

Many thanks - I suspected that you would have my 
answer.  I'm having a problem opening the 
IDEF0.ppri file that you sent.  Do I also need 
the IDEF0.pont and IDEF0.parc files?

I had this problem with a file that I created a 
few days ago.  It wouldn't open and I had to 
start over.  I didn't loose anything of value so 
it wasn't a problem.

I took a WORD look at the IDEF0.ppri file.

We are using the same Protege version.  The file 
content compared to that of the file that I 
developed is obviously different but they look 
very similar.  I don't see any open (...)'s or 
other obvious flags.  Any suggestions?

Yes I'd like a copy of your paper.

Harry


At 10:27 PM -0700 4/19/04, rhodgson wrote:
>Harry,
>
>I have a few Prot?g? models of process ontologies. I did my first
>process modeling in Prot?g? back in my IBM days (around 1998) when
>Prot?g? was much younger. Because of other needs I converted the models
>into Prolog. I could send you a paper I wrote on that.
>
>Anyhow, I have atached a quick effort in OWL I did this evening to
>express the basic constructs of IDEF0. The model has your example in it.
>You were making an inappropriate use of subclasses. You will see what I
>mean from the model I am sending.
>
>To model splits, forks and merge-splits etc., additional classes will be
>needed. But the basic idea is the same. If you can say it in objects you
>can say it in OWL (and more).
>
>On the topic of visualization, a constraint-based drawing system could
>render IDEF0 models. This is the approach that cogito uses.
>
>Incidentally in the NASA Space Shuttle ontology we are modeling
>processes.
>
>Ralph Hodgson
>Executive Partner
>TopQuadrant, Inc.
>Office: (724) 846-9300 ext. 211, Direct: (703) 960-1028, Fax: (425)
>955-5469, Cell: (781) 789-1664
>http://www.topquadrant.com
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Harold P. Frisch [mailto:Harold.P.Frisch@nasa.gov]
>Sent: Monday, April 19, 2004 9:15 AM
>To: 'Ralph Hodgson'
>Subject: Fwd: [step-os] Problems in applying Protege to IDEF0, with an
>AP233 application
>
>
>Ralph
>
>Forgot to put you on the cc list.  If you've got any such Protege
>examples that relate to my problem I'd appreciate a copy so that I
>could see how you get around my brick wall.  Glad to hear you closed
>the loop with David Price.
>
>Harry
>
>>X-Sender: hpfrisch@pop700.gsfc.nasa.gov
>>Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2004 10:14:03 -0400
>>To: step-os@ned.gsfc.nasa.gov
>>From: "Harold P. Frisch" <Harold.P.Frisch@nasa.gov>
>>X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 19 Apr 2004 09:58:49 -0400
>>Cc: sfriedenthal <sanford.friedenthal@lmco.com>,
>>     Chris Paredis <chris.paredis@me.gatech.edu>,
>>     David Oliver <doliver106@cox.net>, "Ives, Barry" <bives@isr.us>,
>>     jskipper@vitechcorp.com, Michael Dickerson <simimike@earthlink.net>
>>Subject: [step-os] Problems in applying Protege to IDEF0,
>>	with an AP233 application
>>X-BeenThere: step-os@step.nasa.gov
>>X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.4
>>Reply-To: STEP Open-Source <step-os@ned.gsfc.nasa.gov>
>>List-Id: STEP Open-Source <step-os.step.nasa.gov>
>>List-Unsubscribe: <http://step.nasa.gov/mailman/listinfo/step-os>,
>>	<mailto:step-os-request@step.nasa.gov?subject=unsubscribe>
>>List-Archive: <http://step.nasa.gov/pipermail/step-os>
>>List-Post: <mailto:step-os@step.nasa.gov>
>>List-Help: <mailto:step-os-request@step.nasa.gov?subject=help>
>>List-Subscribe: <http://step.nasa.gov/mailman/listinfo/step-os>,
>>	<mailto:step-os-request@step.nasa.gov?subject=subscribe>
>>Sender: step-os-bounces@ned.gsfc.nasa.gov
>>
>>Anyone
>>
>>Some help would be appreciated.
>>
>>I've just made an attempt to use Protege to create an ontology based
>>representation of an IDEF0 model for a model-intensive, model based
>  >systems engineering design process.  I wanted to use this model both
>>as a USE case to bound the AP233 "Model Management" capability that
>>I'm trying to define and too also define an OWL model for the
>>complex set of intertwined models and model parameters used in the
>>design process.  I also wanted to learn Protege via a NASA relevant
>>problem that I understood.
>>
>>It didn't take me long to run into a brick wall. I can't figure out
>>if the wall is real STEP-SysML-OWL problem or a product of my lack
>>of Protege experience.
>>
>>A push over this wall would be appreciated.
>>
>>The attachment defines my problem and asks 4 questions that I can't
>>answer.
>>
>>Thanks
>>
>>Harry
>>
>>
>>
>>--
>>Harry
>>-----------
>>Harold P. Frisch
>>Code 592
>>Systems Engineering Division
>>NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center
>>Greenbelt, MD 20771
>>(301) 286-8730 Voice
>>(301) 286-0612 Fax
>>harry.frisch@gsfc.nasa.gov
>>or
>>Harold.P.Frisch@nasa.gov
>>
>>If you're rejected by NASA's SPAM filter use:
>>hpfrisch@pop700.gsfc.nasa.gov
>>
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>step-os mailing list
>>step-os@step.nasa.gov http://step.nasa.gov/mailman/listinfo/step-os
>
>
>--
>Harry
>-----------
>Harold P. Frisch
>Code 592
>Systems Engineering Division
>NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center
>Greenbelt, MD 20771
>(301) 286-8730 Voice
>(301) 286-0612 Fax
>harry.frisch@gsfc.nasa.gov
>or
>Harold.P.Frisch@nasa.gov
>
>If you're rejected by NASA's SPAM filter use:
>hpfrisch@pop700.gsfc.nasa.gov
>
>
>Content-Type: application/octet-stream;
>	name="IDEF0.owl"
>Content-Disposition: attachment;
>	filename="IDEF0.owl"
>
>Attachment converted: Macintosh HD:IDEF0.owl (????/----) (0006BA17)
>Content-Type: application/octet-stream;
>	name="IDEF0.pprj"
>Content-Disposition: attachment;
>	filename="IDEF0.pprj"
>
>Attachment converted: Macintosh HD:IDEF0.pprj (????/----) (0006BA18)


-- 
Harry
-----------
Harold P. Frisch
Code 592
Systems Engineering Division
NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center
Greenbelt, MD 20771
(301) 286-8730 Voice
(301) 286-0612 Fax
harry.frisch@gsfc.nasa.gov
or
Harold.P.Frisch@nasa.gov

If you're rejected by NASA's SPAM filter use:
hpfrisch@pop700.gsfc.nasa.gov

From rhodgson at topquadrant.com  Tue Apr 20 11:11:19 2004
From: rhodgson at topquadrant.com (rhodgson)
Date: Tue Apr 20 10:50:33 2004
Subject: [step-os] Problems in applying Protege to IDEF0,
	with an AP233 application
In-Reply-To: <p06020405bcaab8460393@[128.183.219.44]>
Message-ID: <004701c426e9$c01789a0$de02470a@TQRH>

Harry,

Strange that you cannot open the file. I just detatched the attachments
to another place on my machine and loaded them fine. You only need the
two files. Let me know if you have any more success.

The Prolog paper is attached. You will see that I made some use of the
Object Constraint Language to think through some of the process model
constraints.

Ralph Hodgson
Executive Partner
TopQuadrant, Inc. 
Office: (724) 846-9300 ext. 211, Direct: (703) 960-1028, Fax: (425)
955-5469, Cell: (781) 789-1664
http://www.topquadrant.com



-----Original Message-----
From: Harold P. Frisch [mailto:Harold.P.Frisch@nasa.gov] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2004 4:51 AM
To: rhodgson@topquadrant.com
Cc: STEP Open-Source; 'sfriedenthal'; 'Chris Paredis'; 'David Oliver';
'Ives Barry'; jskipper@vitechcorp.com; 'Michael Dickerson'; 'Stephen
Waterbury'
Subject: RE: [step-os] Problems in applying Protege to IDEF0, with an
AP233 application


Ralph

Many thanks - I suspected that you would have my 
answer.  I'm having a problem opening the 
IDEF0.ppri file that you sent.  Do I also need 
the IDEF0.pont and IDEF0.parc files?

I had this problem with a file that I created a 
few days ago.  It wouldn't open and I had to 
start over.  I didn't loose anything of value so 
it wasn't a problem.

I took a WORD look at the IDEF0.ppri file.

We are using the same Protege version.  The file 
content compared to that of the file that I 
developed is obviously different but they look 
very similar.  I don't see any open (...)'s or 
other obvious flags.  Any suggestions?

Yes I'd like a copy of your paper.

Harry


At 10:27 PM -0700 4/19/04, rhodgson wrote:
>Harry,
>
>I have a few Prot?g? models of process ontologies. I did my first 
>process modeling in Prot?g? back in my IBM days (around 1998) when 
>Prot?g? was much younger. Because of other needs I converted the models

>into Prolog. I could send you a paper I wrote on that.
>
>Anyhow, I have atached a quick effort in OWL I did this evening to 
>express the basic constructs of IDEF0. The model has your example in 
>it. You were making an inappropriate use of subclasses. You will see 
>what I mean from the model I am sending.
>
>To model splits, forks and merge-splits etc., additional classes will 
>be needed. But the basic idea is the same. If you can say it in objects

>you can say it in OWL (and more).
>
>On the topic of visualization, a constraint-based drawing system could 
>render IDEF0 models. This is the approach that cogito uses.
>
>Incidentally in the NASA Space Shuttle ontology we are modeling 
>processes.
>
>Ralph Hodgson
>Executive Partner
>TopQuadrant, Inc.
>Office: (724) 846-9300 ext. 211, Direct: (703) 960-1028, Fax: (425) 
>955-5469, Cell: (781) 789-1664 http://www.topquadrant.com
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Harold P. Frisch [mailto:Harold.P.Frisch@nasa.gov]
>Sent: Monday, April 19, 2004 9:15 AM
>To: 'Ralph Hodgson'
>Subject: Fwd: [step-os] Problems in applying Protege to IDEF0, with an 
>AP233 application
>
>
>Ralph
>
>Forgot to put you on the cc list.  If you've got any such Protege 
>examples that relate to my problem I'd appreciate a copy so that I 
>could see how you get around my brick wall.  Glad to hear you closed 
>the loop with David Price.
>
>Harry
>
>>X-Sender: hpfrisch@pop700.gsfc.nasa.gov
>>Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2004 10:14:03 -0400
>>To: step-os@ned.gsfc.nasa.gov
>>From: "Harold P. Frisch" <Harold.P.Frisch@nasa.gov>
>>X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 19 Apr 2004 09:58:49 -0400
>>Cc: sfriedenthal <sanford.friedenthal@lmco.com>,
>>     Chris Paredis <chris.paredis@me.gatech.edu>,
>>     David Oliver <doliver106@cox.net>, "Ives, Barry" <bives@isr.us>,
>>     jskipper@vitechcorp.com, Michael Dickerson 
>><simimike@earthlink.net>
>>Subject: [step-os] Problems in applying Protege to IDEF0,
>>	with an AP233 application
>>X-BeenThere: step-os@step.nasa.gov
>>X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.4
>>Reply-To: STEP Open-Source <step-os@ned.gsfc.nasa.gov>
>>List-Id: STEP Open-Source <step-os.step.nasa.gov>
>>List-Unsubscribe: <http://step.nasa.gov/mailman/listinfo/step-os>,
>>	<mailto:step-os-request@step.nasa.gov?subject=unsubscribe>
>>List-Archive: <http://step.nasa.gov/pipermail/step-os>
>>List-Post: <mailto:step-os@step.nasa.gov>
>>List-Help: <mailto:step-os-request@step.nasa.gov?subject=help>
>>List-Subscribe: <http://step.nasa.gov/mailman/listinfo/step-os>,
>>	<mailto:step-os-request@step.nasa.gov?subject=subscribe>
>>Sender: step-os-bounces@ned.gsfc.nasa.gov
>>
>>Anyone
>>
>>Some help would be appreciated.
>>
>>I've just made an attempt to use Protege to create an ontology based 
>>representation of an IDEF0 model for a model-intensive, model based
>  >systems engineering design process.  I wanted to use this model both
>>as a USE case to bound the AP233 "Model Management" capability that 
>>I'm trying to define and too also define an OWL model for the complex 
>>set of intertwined models and model parameters used in the design 
>>process.  I also wanted to learn Protege via a NASA relevant problem 
>>that I understood.
>>
>>It didn't take me long to run into a brick wall. I can't figure out if

>>the wall is real STEP-SysML-OWL problem or a product of my lack of 
>>Protege experience.
>>
>>A push over this wall would be appreciated.
>>
>>The attachment defines my problem and asks 4 questions that I can't 
>>answer.
>>
>>Thanks
>>
>>Harry
>>
>>
>>
>>--
>>Harry
>>-----------
>>Harold P. Frisch
>>Code 592
>>Systems Engineering Division
>>NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center
>>Greenbelt, MD 20771
>>(301) 286-8730 Voice
>>(301) 286-0612 Fax
>>harry.frisch@gsfc.nasa.gov
>>or
>>Harold.P.Frisch@nasa.gov
>>
>>If you're rejected by NASA's SPAM filter use: 
>>hpfrisch@pop700.gsfc.nasa.gov
>>
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>step-os mailing list
>>step-os@step.nasa.gov http://step.nasa.gov/mailman/listinfo/step-os
>
>
>--
>Harry
>-----------
>Harold P. Frisch
>Code 592
>Systems Engineering Division
>NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center
>Greenbelt, MD 20771
>(301) 286-8730 Voice
>(301) 286-0612 Fax
>harry.frisch@gsfc.nasa.gov
>or
>Harold.P.Frisch@nasa.gov
>
>If you're rejected by NASA's SPAM filter use: 
>hpfrisch@pop700.gsfc.nasa.gov
>
>
>Content-Type: application/octet-stream;
>	name="IDEF0.owl"
>Content-Disposition: attachment;
>	filename="IDEF0.owl"
>
>Attachment converted: Macintosh HD:IDEF0.owl (????/----) (0006BA17)
>Content-Type: application/octet-stream;
>	name="IDEF0.pprj"
>Content-Disposition: attachment;
>	filename="IDEF0.pprj"
>
>Attachment converted: Macintosh HD:IDEF0.pprj (????/----) (0006BA18)


-- 
Harry
-----------
Harold P. Frisch
Code 592
Systems Engineering Division
NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center
Greenbelt, MD 20771
(301) 286-8730 Voice
(301) 286-0612 Fax
harry.frisch@gsfc.nasa.gov
or
Harold.P.Frisch@nasa.gov

If you're rejected by NASA's SPAM filter use:
hpfrisch@pop700.gsfc.nasa.gov
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: inap2000rh6.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 105512 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://step.nasa.gov/pipermail/step-os/attachments/20040420/6b6377db/inap2000rh6-0001.pdf
From Harold.P.Frisch at nasa.gov  Thu Apr 22 13:03:13 2004
From: Harold.P.Frisch at nasa.gov (Harold P. Frisch)
Date: Thu Apr 22 12:33:26 2004
Subject: [step-os] Problems in applying Protege to IDEF0, with an
	AP233 application
Message-ID: <p06020406bcadab13bfe3@[128.183.219.44]>

>Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2004 10:54:58 -0400
>To: <rhodgson@topquadrant.com>
>From: "Harold P. Frisch" <Harold.P.Frisch@nasa.gov>
>Subject: RE: [step-os] Problems in applying 
>Protege to IDEF0, with an AP233 application
>Cc: "'sfriedenthal'" 
><sanford.friedenthal@lmco.com>, "'Chris 
>Paredis'" <chris.paredis@me.gatech.edu>, "'David 
>Oliver'" <doliver106@cox.net>, "'Ives Barry'" 
><bives@isr.us>, <jskipper@vitechcorp.com>, 
>"'Michael Dickerson'" <simimike@earthlink.net>, 
>"'Stephen Waterbury'" <golux@comcast.net>
>Bcc:
>X-Attachments:
>
>Ralph
>
>Very nice - I see what you've done.  Now I'll 
>carry it a few levels of abstraction deeper to 
>see if I find anymore brick walls and too more 
>fully appreciate the IDEF0 capturing framework 
>that you have defined.
>
>Seems to me that a GIT or Univ of MD student 
>could use your framework to write a mapping tool 
>that would map an IDEF0 data file directly into 
>an OWL model.  Is there some road block to this 
>that I don't see?
>
>All
>
>Ralph's earlier attachment only seems to work 
>with the most recent copy of Protege and the OWL 
>plugin.  If you try it, keep a copy of the 
>original on the side so you can start over. 
>Whenever I do a SAVE I can't loose half the file 
>and can't recover.
>
>Harry
>
>
>
>At 10:27 PM -0700 4/19/04, rhodgson wrote:
>>Harry,
>>
>>I have a few Prot?g? models of process ontologies. I did my first
>>process modeling in Prot?g? back in my IBM days (around 1998) when
>>Prot?g? was much younger. Because of other needs I converted the models
>>into Prolog. I could send you a paper I wrote on that.
>>
>>Anyhow, I have atached a quick effort in OWL I did this evening to
>>express the basic constructs of IDEF0. The model has your example in it.
>>You were making an inappropriate use of subclasses. You will see what I
>>mean from the model I am sending.
>>
>>To model splits, forks and merge-splits etc., additional classes will be
>>needed. But the basic idea is the same. If you can say it in objects you
>>can say it in OWL (and more).
>>
>>On the topic of visualization, a constraint-based drawing system could
>>render IDEF0 models. This is the approach that cogito uses.
>>
>>Incidentally in the NASA Space Shuttle ontology we are modeling
>>processes.
>>
>>Ralph Hodgson
>>Executive Partner
>>TopQuadrant, Inc.
>>Office: (724) 846-9300 ext. 211, Direct: (703) 960-1028, Fax: (425)
>>955-5469, Cell: (781) 789-1664
>>http://www.topquadrant.com
>>
>>
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Harold P. Frisch [mailto:Harold.P.Frisch@nasa.gov]
>>Sent: Monday, April 19, 2004 9:15 AM
>>To: 'Ralph Hodgson'
>>Subject: Fwd: [step-os] Problems in applying Protege to IDEF0, with an
>>AP233 application
>>
>>
>>Ralph
>>
>>Forgot to put you on the cc list.  If you've got any such Protege
>>examples that relate to my problem I'd appreciate a copy so that I
>>could see how you get around my brick wall.  Glad to hear you closed
>>the loop with David Price.
>>
>>Harry
>>
>>>X-Sender: hpfrisch@pop700.gsfc.nasa.gov
>>>Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2004 10:14:03 -0400
>>>To: step-os@ned.gsfc.nasa.gov
>>>From: "Harold P. Frisch" <Harold.P.Frisch@nasa.gov>
>>>X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 19 Apr 2004 09:58:49 -0400
>>>Cc: sfriedenthal <sanford.friedenthal@lmco.com>,
>>>     Chris Paredis <chris.paredis@me.gatech.edu>,
>>>     David Oliver <doliver106@cox.net>, "Ives, Barry" <bives@isr.us>,
>>>     jskipper@vitechcorp.com, Michael Dickerson <simimike@earthlink.net>
>>>Subject: [step-os] Problems in applying Protege to IDEF0,
>>>	with an AP233 application
>>>X-BeenThere: step-os@step.nasa.gov
>>>X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.4
>>>Reply-To: STEP Open-Source <step-os@ned.gsfc.nasa.gov>
>>>List-Id: STEP Open-Source <step-os.step.nasa.gov>
>>>List-Unsubscribe: <http://step.nasa.gov/mailman/listinfo/step-os>,
>>>	<mailto:step-os-request@step.nasa.gov?subject=unsubscribe>
>>>List-Archive: <http://step.nasa.gov/pipermail/step-os>
>>>List-Post: <mailto:step-os@step.nasa.gov>
>>>List-Help: <mailto:step-os-request@step.nasa.gov?subject=help>
>>>List-Subscribe: <http://step.nasa.gov/mailman/listinfo/step-os>,
>>>	<mailto:step-os-request@step.nasa.gov?subject=subscribe>
>>  >Sender: step-os-bounces@ned.gsfc.nasa.gov
>>>
>>>Anyone
>>>
>>>Some help would be appreciated.
>>>
>>>I've just made an attempt to use Protege to create an ontology based
>>>representation of an IDEF0 model for a model-intensive, model based
>>  >systems engineering design process.  I wanted to use this model both
>>>as a USE case to bound the AP233 "Model Management" capability that
>>>I'm trying to define and too also define an OWL model for the
>>>complex set of intertwined models and model parameters used in the
>>>design process.  I also wanted to learn Protege via a NASA relevant
>>>problem that I understood.
>>>
>>>It didn't take me long to run into a brick wall. I can't figure out
>>>if the wall is real STEP-SysML-OWL problem or a product of my lack
>>>of Protege experience.
>>>
>>>A push over this wall would be appreciated.
>>>
>>>The attachment defines my problem and asks 4 questions that I can't
>>>answer.
>>>
>>>Thanks
>>>
>>>Harry
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>--
>>>Harry
>>>-----------
>>>Harold P. Frisch
>>>Code 592
>>>Systems Engineering Division
>>>NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center
>>>Greenbelt, MD 20771
>>>(301) 286-8730 Voice
>>>(301) 286-0612 Fax
>>>harry.frisch@gsfc.nasa.gov
>>>or
>>>Harold.P.Frisch@nasa.gov
>>>
>>>If you're rejected by NASA's SPAM filter use:
>>>hpfrisch@pop700.gsfc.nasa.gov
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>step-os mailing list
>>>step-os@step.nasa.gov http://step.nasa.gov/mailman/listinfo/step-os
>>
>>
>>--
>>Harry
>>-----------
>>Harold P. Frisch
>>Code 592
>>Systems Engineering Division
>>NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center
>>Greenbelt, MD 20771
>>(301) 286-8730 Voice
>>(301) 286-0612 Fax
>>harry.frisch@gsfc.nasa.gov
>>or
>>Harold.P.Frisch@nasa.gov
>>
>>If you're rejected by NASA's SPAM filter use:
>>hpfrisch@pop700.gsfc.nasa.gov
>>
>>
>>Content-Type: application/octet-stream;
>>	name="IDEF0.owl"
>>Content-Disposition: attachment;
>>	filename="IDEF0.owl"
>>
>>Attachment converted: Macintosh HD:IDEF0.owl (????/----) (0006BA17)
>>Content-Type: application/octet-stream;
>>	name="IDEF0.pprj"
>>Content-Disposition: attachment;
>>	filename="IDEF0.pprj"
>>
>>Attachment converted: Macintosh HD:IDEF0.pprj (????/----) (0006BA18)
>
>
>--
>
>Harry
>-----------
>Harold P. Frisch
>Code 592
>Systems Engineering Division
>NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center
>Greenbelt, MD 20771
>(301) 286-8730 Voice
>(301) 286-0612 Fax
>harry.frisch@gsfc.nasa.gov
>or
>Harold.P.Frisch@nasa.gov
>
>If you're rejected by NASA's SPAM filter use:
>hpfrisch@pop700.gsfc.nasa.gov


-- 
Harry
-----------
Harold P. Frisch
Code 592
Systems Engineering Division
NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center
Greenbelt, MD 20771
(301) 286-8730 Voice
(301) 286-0612 Fax
harry.frisch@gsfc.nasa.gov
or
Harold.P.Frisch@nasa.gov

If you're rejected by NASA's SPAM filter use:
hpfrisch@pop700.gsfc.nasa.gov
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://step.nasa.gov/pipermail/step-os/attachments/20040422/916bad11/attachment.html
From david.price at eurostep.com  Mon Apr 26 12:20:53 2004
From: david.price at eurostep.com (David Price)
Date: Mon Apr 26 11:50:57 2004
Subject: [step-os] And the kick-off:  STEP and ontologies
In-Reply-To: <4071E3E8.3@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <001f01c42baa$723977a0$2101a8c0@esukpc20>

FYI, Rob B and I will be writing a more formal paper to explain the
continued work we've been doing for STEP-based data exchange and OWL. This
will address your question 3 a bit too. This is, however, not the same thing
as a STEP-based ontology.

As for STEP-OWL, this isn't just EXPRESS->OWL. I think there will have to be
AP-specific translators to turn STEP exchange files into ontology-driven
data. This is because some of the instances in the STEP file represent
classes in the ontology.

As for STEP->UML, Part 25 is defined for EXPRESS->UML if that's what you
mean. It really needs an edition 2 to cover EXPRESS 2, UML Profiles, etc.

More to come...
David

> -----Original Message-----
> From: step-os-bounces@ned.gsfc.nasa.gov [mailto:step-os-
> bounces@ned.gsfc.nasa.gov] On Behalf Of Stephen C. Waterbury
> Sent: 05 April 2004 23:56
> To: STEP Open-Source
> Subject: [step-os] And the kick-off: STEP and ontologies
> 
> Greetings, fellow STEP-OSers!
> 
> Judging by our membership (which you can see if you go
> to http://step.nasa.gov/mailman/listinfo/step-os and enter
> your address and password), I think we have a quorum.
> Also, all messages to this list go into our archive:
> http://www.step.nasa.gov/pipermail/step-os ... so late-comers
> will have access to our discussion history, anyway. ;)
> 
> I'm kicking things off with this message on the subject of
> STEP and ontologies ... which is actually material for
> several threads, so please feel free to go off on any
> tangent that appeals to you.
> 
> One of my main interests in this regard is how best to integrate
> STEP and STEP-based ontologies into the development and application
> of the many other ontologies that are used in an enterprise.
> 
> David Price's "exPRESS for free" experiments and his paper
> (see http://exff.org, and more specifically
> http://homepages.nildram.co.uk/~esukpc20/exff_r01a2/docs/semweb_step.html)
> have shown, among other things, that STEP AP's and instance data
> can be brought into the Semantic Web representational idiom
> (OWL, for example).
> 
> Also, one of David's presentations at the recent ISO SC4
> meeting, "Building a Bridge from STEP-land", lays out many
> of the issues I'd like to discuss here.  [David, are you okay
> with making those slides either public or at least accessible
> to members of this list?  Perhaps on the exff site?  Or send
> it to me with your Wiki material ... hint, hint!]
> 
> So here are some questions that naturally arise (this is not
> an exhaustive list -- please add to and comment on it!):
> 
> (1) Would it be useful to define some "recommended practices" for
> doing (e.g.) STEP -> UML, STEP -> OWL, etc. transformations?
> (I think so.)  If so, I propose to use this forum to discuss
> the development, prototyping, and testing of them.
> 
> (2) Would it be useful to define some "high-level interfaces" for
> STEP-aware applications to use in interacting with STEP data?
> EuroSTEP -- and specifically, Ian Bailey :) -- has already done
> work in this area, which I think is a critical piece of the
> architecture needed to put access to STEP technology into the
> hands of enterprise developers.  Again, I think the prototyping,
> testing, and validation of these interfaces could be a very
> appropriate activity for this forum.
> 
> (3) Finally, I'd like to look at providing the developers
> of enterprise ontologies (which are proliferating like rabbits
> these days ;) with methods and tools to discover, integrate with,
> leverage, and avoid duplicating (!) STEP-based ontologies -- by
> which I mean to include both "canonically derived" ones in (1)
> and the possibly more "adapted" ones of (2).  Of course, this
> issue is not unique to STEP, so there may be both COTS and
> open-source solutions out there, but the ones I've seen seem
> to be relatively primitive.
> 
> Cheers,
> Steve
> 
> _______________________________________________
> step-os mailing list
> step-os@step.nasa.gov
> http://step.nasa.gov/mailman/listinfo/step-os


From golux at comcast.net  Mon Apr 26 13:03:01 2004
From: golux at comcast.net (Stephen C. Waterbury)
Date: Mon Apr 26 12:33:09 2004
Subject: [step-os] And the kick-off:  STEP and ontologies
In-Reply-To: <001f01c42baa$723977a0$2101a8c0@esukpc20>
References: <001f01c42baa$723977a0$2101a8c0@esukpc20>
Message-ID: <408D40C5.5080109@comcast.net>

David Price wrote:
> FYI, Rob B and I will be writing a more formal paper to explain the
> continued work we've been doing for STEP-based data exchange and OWL. This
> will address your question 3 a bit too. This is, however, not the same thing
> as a STEP-based ontology.

Actually I've used the term "STEP-based ontology" pretty
loosely.  We might want to give it a more rigorous definition
if we want to use it to classify ontologies.  :)

> As for STEP-OWL, this isn't just EXPRESS->OWL. I think there will have to be
> AP-specific translators to turn STEP exchange files into ontology-driven
> data. ...

We are on exactly the same page here.

> ... This is because some of the instances in the STEP file represent
> classes in the ontology.

Which probably also implies that we will need OWL Full.
I expected that.

> As for STEP->UML, Part 25 is defined for EXPRESS->UML if that's what you
> mean. It really needs an edition 2 to cover EXPRESS 2, UML Profiles, etc.

Yes ... there's more work ahead.  :)

Cheers,
Steve

From david.price at eurostep.com  Mon Apr 26 13:23:28 2004
From: david.price at eurostep.com (David Price)
Date: Mon Apr 26 12:54:47 2004
Subject: [step-os] And the kick-off:  STEP and ontologies
In-Reply-To: <408D40C5.5080109@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <002a01c42bb3$304e8890$2101a8c0@esukpc20>

Steve,

ON:

>> ... This is because some of the instances in the STEP file represent 
>> classes in the ontology.

>Which probably also implies that we will need OWL Full.
>I expected that.

I don't know that this is the case yet. OWL Full would will only be required
if the same class must also be treated as an individual *in the ontology*,
it's not related to whether it was an entity instance in the EXPRESS.
Whether we need class of class is the big question. For example, the entity
product_category is likely a class of class, but we could simply take the
instances of product_category and make them subclasses of a class called
product. Using that approach, product_category doesn't really appear in the
resulting ontology.

On definitions, we've recognized two kinds of ISO 10303-related ontologies
at the moment: 1) those used as reference data for a data exchange and 2)
those that enable inferencing/reasoners. I guess we could also just use
native OWL as an XML data exchange syntax by mapping EXPRESS entity to OWL
class and entity instance to OWL individual as well. In that case, OWL
replaces the Part 28 XML. So, there may be a third possibility worth
discussing.

Cheers,
David

> -----Original Message-----
> From: step-os-bounces@ned.gsfc.nasa.gov [mailto:step-os-
> bounces@ned.gsfc.nasa.gov] On Behalf Of Stephen C. Waterbury
> Sent: 26 April 2004 18:03
> To: STEP Open-Source
> Subject: Re: [step-os] And the kick-off: STEP and ontologies
> 
> David Price wrote:
> > FYI, Rob B and I will be writing a more formal paper to explain the
> > continued work we've been doing for STEP-based data exchange and OWL.
> This
> > will address your question 3 a bit too. This is, however, not the same
> thing
> > as a STEP-based ontology.
> 
> Actually I've used the term "STEP-based ontology" pretty
> loosely.  We might want to give it a more rigorous definition
> if we want to use it to classify ontologies.  :)
> 
> > As for STEP-OWL, this isn't just EXPRESS->OWL. I think there will have
> to be
> > AP-specific translators to turn STEP exchange files into ontology-driven
> > data. ...
> 
> We are on exactly the same page here.
> 
> > ... This is because some of the instances in the STEP file represent
> > classes in the ontology.
> 
> Which probably also implies that we will need OWL Full.
> I expected that.
> 
> > As for STEP->UML, Part 25 is defined for EXPRESS->UML if that's what you
> > mean. It really needs an edition 2 to cover EXPRESS 2, UML Profiles,
> etc.
> 
> Yes ... there's more work ahead.  :)
> 
> Cheers,
> Steve
> 
> _______________________________________________
> step-os mailing list
> step-os@step.nasa.gov
> http://step.nasa.gov/mailman/listinfo/step-os


From golux at comcast.net  Mon Apr 26 14:26:28 2004
From: golux at comcast.net (Stephen C. Waterbury)
Date: Mon Apr 26 13:56:26 2004
Subject: [step-os] And the kick-off:  STEP and ontologies
In-Reply-To: <002a01c42bb3$304e8890$2101a8c0@esukpc20>
References: <002a01c42bb3$304e8890$2101a8c0@esukpc20>
Message-ID: <408D5454.6040902@comcast.net>

David Price wrote:
ON:
>>>... This is because some of the instances in the STEP file represent 
>>>classes in the ontology.
> 
>>Which probably also implies that we will need OWL Full.
>>I expected that.
> 
> I don't know that this is the case yet. OWL Full would will only be required
> if the same class must also be treated as an individual *in the ontology*,
> it's not related to whether it was an entity instance in the EXPRESS.
> Whether we need class of class is the big question.

Good point (note that I said "probably" :).  It could be implemented
either way, or both ways.  In any case, it might be possible to define
an OWL-Full scope with well-defined sub-scopes that are OWL-DL,
somewhat analogous to the late-bound and early-bound exchange formats,
but potentially more coherent, I think.

> For example, the entity
> product_category is likely a class of class, but we could simply take the
> instances of product_category and make them subclasses of a class called
> product. Using that approach, product_category doesn't really appear in the
> resulting ontology.

Yep.  That is probably the simplest approach, so it's probably
the best for prototyping and getting something that works.
More than that might be YAGNI, anyway.  :)

Of course, the ontologies that applications use internally
won't necessarily be the same as the external exchange or
API ontologies that they understand.  (I'm still working on
giving PanGalactic an internal meta-architecture along the
lines of PEAK's MOF-like approach, so that it will
be able to adapt to any species of OWL.  :)

> On definitions, we've recognized two kinds of ISO 10303-related ontologies
> at the moment: 1) those used as reference data for a data exchange and 2)
> those that enable inferencing/reasoners.

That seems like a useful distinction.  A third might
be ARM-level, API-like ontologies.  Analogous to the PDM
Enablers, and related to (1) in a similar way, but more
likely to be implemented in a Web Services context.

> I guess we could also just use
> native OWL as an XML data exchange syntax by mapping EXPRESS entity to OWL
> class and entity instance to OWL individual as well. In that case, OWL
> replaces the Part 28 XML. So, there may be a third possibility worth
> discussing.

Okay, a fourth.  :)

This worries me a little about the possible proliferation of
"standard" exchange syntaxes, given the amount of work that has
already gone into Part 28.  On the one hand, well-defined conversions
between them could be specified, and we could provide free tools to
do that.  But that is another dependency and would make it difficult
to create a "simple" application interface that can deal with
STEP data if there are so many formats in which it might receive it.
But perhaps that's too much to hope for.  Ah, for the good old days
when there was just Part 21.  Life was simple then!  (Ha. :)

Cheers,
Steve