UML via XML ?

UML via XML ?

[Boris Daix]

Hi,

   I was wondering if some of us have already worked on UML models :
it seams that using XML to do this is a good way, but I'd like to get
some experience feedback if any.  It's not talking about Linux yet...
But I can say that I intend to use emacs + psgml + tdtd to work with
this stuff, as these tools look very appropriate.  I haven't worked
with XML yet, but UML is required in my studies and I'd love to be
efficient with this as modeling is something blinds do well :-)
   I'm interested with DocBook writters too, if any.

   So, please let me know your experience, ideas or suggestions on
this -- I'll probably be able to give feedback soon, if someone is
interested, but starting with some tips should help me a lot...

Thank you
-- 
Boris Daix

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

Re: UML via XML ?

[Neil Graham]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=X-UNKNOWN, Size: 1979 bytes --]

Hi Boris.  Strictly speaking, this is off-topic, so we should probably
take this off-list at some point...

On Fri, 25 Oct 2002, Boris Daix wrote:

> Hi,
> 
>    I was wondering if some of us have already worked on UML models :

As a matter of fact, I just finished a week-long course in UML and design
patterns.  Admittedly, it used Rational Rose, which is a heinously
inaccessible tool; but even setting aside that, UML is basically an
intensely graphical--pictorial might perhaps be a better term--means of
representing objects and their relationships.  i.e., I didn't get much 
out of the UML component of my course, and it's not clear to me
how useful UML itself can be to folks who are blind.  

> it seams that using XML to do this is a good way, but I'd like to get
> some experience feedback if any.  

Judging from http://www.omg.org, there is a standard that describes
"metamodels" in an abstract way; UML is a special case of
a metamodel.  This is MOF, or the metaObject Facility.  To facilitate a
vendor-neutral means of representing MOF, OMG has developed XMI--XML
Metadata Interchange.  So it should be possible, if you took an XMI
representation of a UML model, to do something really intelligent with it
in order to make it usable by us.  But I said possible, not obviously
tractable.  :)

> But I can say that I intend to use emacs + psgml + tdtd to work with
> this stuff, as these tools look very appropriate.  

Remember that XML is not an SGML language, so you probably don't want to
use an SGML parser for it.  There are loads of XML parsers that will run
on Linux and that can be called from all manner of languages; let me know
if you want references (I get paid to work on the Apache Xerces-Java
project, so I have to know a bit about this. :))

I've only started delving into this; would love to hear from the many more
experienced developers on this list with other perspectives.  (That is, if
Hans doesn't shut this down first. :) )

Cheers,
Neil

Re: UML via XML ?

[Boris Daix]

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

> Hi Boris.  Strictly speaking, this is off-topic, so we should probably
> take this off-list at some point...

I'm blind and I intend to use Linux to do something... I hope it's not
too OT ; and the problem is covered nowhere -- if it is, please let me
know...

> On Fri, 25 Oct 2002, Boris Daix wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> 
>>    I was wondering if some of us have already worked on UML models :
>
> As a matter of fact, I just finished a week-long course in UML and design
> patterns.  Admittedly, it used Rational Rose, which is a heinously
> inaccessible tool;

It's the product I'm supposed to use too, here at INSA
(www.if.insa-lyon.fr) 

> but even setting aside that, UML is basically an
> intensely graphical--pictorial might perhaps be a better term--means of
> representing objects and their relationships.  i.e., I didn't get much 
> out of the UML component of my course, and it's not clear to me
> how useful UML itself can be to folks who are blind.  

It's a standard in software engineering (I didn't talk about Merise,
that's a french method, graphical too), and I'll soon be asked to give
UML as I'll be supposed to read it : sure, I won't work directly with
this method, but there should be a way to match these needs, via Linux
especially.

>> it seams that using XML to do this is a good way, but I'd like to get
>> some experience feedback if any.  
>
> Judging from http://www.omg.org, there is a standard that describes
> "metamodels" in an abstract way; UML is a special case of
> a metamodel.  This is MOF, or the metaObject Facility.  To facilitate a
> vendor-neutral means of representing MOF, OMG has developed XMI--XML
> Metadata Interchange.  So it should be possible, if you took an XMI
> representation of a UML model, to do something really intelligent with it
> in order to make it usable by us.

Yes, and that's what I'm looking for :-) It seams possible, that's why
I'm investigating it, 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.

> But I said possible, not obviously tractable.  :)
>> But I can say that I intend to use emacs + psgml + tdtd to work with
>> this stuff, as these tools look very appropriate.  
>
> Remember that XML is not an SGML language, so you probably don't want to
> use an SGML parser for it. 

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.
What can do the biggest is supposed to do the simplest...  I'm not
talking about processors/generators yet, just editing utilities
accessible to us.

> There are loads of XML parsers that will run
> on Linux and that can be called from all manner of languages; let me know
> if you want references (I get paid to work on the Apache Xerces-Java
> project, so I have to know a bit about this. :))

I don't know this project but all info is welcome, in private this
time, maybe ;-) 

> I've only started delving into this; would love to hear from the many more
> experienced developers on this list with other perspectives.  (That is, if
> Hans doesn't shut this down first. :) )

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 ! :-)

Thank you for reply
Bye
-- 
Boris Daix

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

Re: UML via XML ?

[Neil Graham]

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

Re: UML via XML ?

[Boris Daix]

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..."