Re: [topicmaps-comment] uml and topic maps

[Mario Klesse <mklesse@stud.fh-heilbronn.de>]

> I know some work has been done on modelling XML schema
> and dtd's using UML.
I tried to model the topic map schema/template of a simple topic map in uml,
but I was not very satisfied with my result.

> Has anyone done any work modelling topic maps with
> UML?
>
> At first glance, a topic map seems to correspond to
> some sort of object diagram - while a topic map
> schema seems to correspond to a class diagram.
Yes, that was my approach too. Typing topics and their class hierarchy can
be modelled in a class diagram, I used a stereotype <<topic type>> for the
classes. The type of an association beetween objects of the classes (which
is instantiated then) I modelled by naming the association between the
classes. Types of Topics, which reify an association I modelled as
association class with stereotype <<reification>>.

But I didn't find a good way to model scope, basenames and occurrences. For
basenames and occurrences one could use attributes, but that's not really
corresponding to the nature of topic maps.

I'm not sure whether it's the right approach to model Topic Maps in uml,
because in topic maps you haven't that clear distinction between classes and
objects as it is enforced in uml.

I'm also interested how other people model topic maps.


Mario Klesse