Re: UML via XML ?

[Boris Daix <Boris.Daix@insa-lyon.fr>]

Hi,

   And thank you for advice and remarks.  I'll tell you when I'll find
good solution, if any :-) 

bye

Neil Graham <neil@cs.toronto.edu> writes:

> Hi Boris,
>
> On Sat, 26 Oct 2002, Boris Daix wrote:
>
>> I feel the solution is not so far... I can say
>> that, for sure, the software you mentionned can export UML works in
>> XML-like formats, that's already a not-so-bad thing.
>
> So if I understand your plan, you're planning to figure out the
> (indirect) mapping from UML to XMI, then use an SGML editor to write XMI
> documents that you'll then feed to a UML generator.  Evidently, this is
> indeed possible.  
>
>> Well, psgml is an emacs-mode, not a parser.  But anyway, I've read
>> that SGML parser can read XML, as HTML : the Python modules for SGML
>> are often used to parse HTML, as it's a "tag-fashion" language too.
>
> HTML is an SGML language; XML is not.  The trouble with using an SGML
> editor to generate XML is that you're very likely to generate an
> ill-formed XML document, which will cause an XML processor--like the one
> that must underlie the UML generator--to barf all over your shoes.  I'm
> certain emacs will have some kind of native XML mode, and equally that
> emacspeak will support it well (TV Raman helped develop VoiceXML, so I
> daresay he'll have completely solved this problem.  :) )  But this is
> an anthill compared with the mountain of the core problem...
>
>> He he...  I believe that if I say to my teatchers "Hey, look, with
>> GNU/Linux, I'm able to work with UML (via XML)", I'm sure Open Software
>> would be clapped for hours ! :-)
>
> No question.  If I were you though, I think I'd unearth my manual tactile
> diagram-drawing tools and crank UML out that way.  That's how I did
> digital circuit diagrams way back when and it worked well enough; but then
> everyone else was working manually too, so my disadvantage wasn't
> acute.  But I'd analogize the XMI-to-UML solution to writing Java by using
> a binary editor to produce bytecode, then using a disassembler to induce
> Java from it...  In fact, that'd probably be much easier since bytecode
> maps naturally back to Java, whereas XMI only maps to UML via the indirect
> route of the MOF.  :)
>
> Anyway, best of luck!  I dunno about other folks, but I'd love to hear how
> you end up solving this problem; it's one more and more of us will face in
> the future, no doubt about it.
>
> Cheers,
> Neil
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Blinux-list mailing list
> Blinux-list@redhat.com
> https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/blinux-list
>

-- 
Boris Daix

	"Feel free to be Free, or not to be..."