Comparing topic maps constraint specification languages

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Librelotto, Giovani Rubert
Publication Date: 2008
Other Authors: Azevedo, Renato Preigschadt de, Ramalho, José Carlos, Henriques, Pedro Rangel
Language: eng
Source: Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)
Download full: http://hdl.handle.net/1822/7399
Summary: Topic Map Constraint Language (TMCL) provides a means to express constraints on topic maps conforming to ISO/IEC 13250. In this article, we will use a test suite and show, step-by-step, the way we handled several kinds of Topic Maps constraints in many different instances in order to answer questions like: Do they do the same job? Are there some kinds of Topic Maps constraints that are easier to specify with one of them? Do you need different background to use the tools? Is it possible to use them in similar situations (the same topic maps instances)? May we use them to produce an equal result? How do AsTMa!, OSL, Toma, and XTche relate to Topic Maps Constraint Language (TMCL)? What kind of constraints each one of these three can not specify? We will conclude this paper with a summary of the comparisons accomplished between those Topic Maps constraint languages over the use case proposed.
id RCAP_9e9f548eb020738a7e598e53b4a2a037
oai_identifier_str oai:repositorium.sdum.uminho.pt:1822/7399
network_acronym_str RCAP
network_name_str Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)
repository_id_str https://opendoar.ac.uk/repository/7160
spelling Comparing topic maps constraint specification languagesTopic mapsOntologySemantic validationTMCLScience & TechnologyTopic Map Constraint Language (TMCL) provides a means to express constraints on topic maps conforming to ISO/IEC 13250. In this article, we will use a test suite and show, step-by-step, the way we handled several kinds of Topic Maps constraints in many different instances in order to answer questions like: Do they do the same job? Are there some kinds of Topic Maps constraints that are easier to specify with one of them? Do you need different background to use the tools? Is it possible to use them in similar situations (the same topic maps instances)? May we use them to produce an equal result? How do AsTMa!, OSL, Toma, and XTche relate to Topic Maps Constraint Language (TMCL)? What kind of constraints each one of these three can not specify? We will conclude this paper with a summary of the comparisons accomplished between those Topic Maps constraint languages over the use case proposed.Springer VerlagUniversidade do MinhoLibrelotto, Giovani RubertAzevedo, Renato Preigschadt deRamalho, José CarlosHenriques, Pedro Rangel20082008-01-01T00:00:00Zconference paperinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/1822/7399engINTERNATIONAL COMFERENCE ON TOPIC MAPS RESEARCH AND APPLICATIONS (TMRA), 3, Leipzig, GERMANY, 2007 – “Scaling Topic Maps”. [Leipzig : s.n., 2008].97835407087350302-974310.1007/978-3-540-70874-2_10info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)instname:FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologiainstacron:RCAAP2024-05-11T06:25:54Zoai:repositorium.sdum.uminho.pt:1822/7399Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireinfo@rcaap.ptopendoar:https://opendoar.ac.uk/repository/71602025-05-28T15:53:02.062543Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) - FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologiafalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Comparing topic maps constraint specification languages
title Comparing topic maps constraint specification languages
spellingShingle Comparing topic maps constraint specification languages
Librelotto, Giovani Rubert
Topic maps
Ontology
Semantic validation
TMCL
Science & Technology
title_short Comparing topic maps constraint specification languages
title_full Comparing topic maps constraint specification languages
title_fullStr Comparing topic maps constraint specification languages
title_full_unstemmed Comparing topic maps constraint specification languages
title_sort Comparing topic maps constraint specification languages
author Librelotto, Giovani Rubert
author_facet Librelotto, Giovani Rubert
Azevedo, Renato Preigschadt de
Ramalho, José Carlos
Henriques, Pedro Rangel
author_role author
author2 Azevedo, Renato Preigschadt de
Ramalho, José Carlos
Henriques, Pedro Rangel
author2_role author
author
author
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv Universidade do Minho
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Librelotto, Giovani Rubert
Azevedo, Renato Preigschadt de
Ramalho, José Carlos
Henriques, Pedro Rangel
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Topic maps
Ontology
Semantic validation
TMCL
Science & Technology
topic Topic maps
Ontology
Semantic validation
TMCL
Science & Technology
description Topic Map Constraint Language (TMCL) provides a means to express constraints on topic maps conforming to ISO/IEC 13250. In this article, we will use a test suite and show, step-by-step, the way we handled several kinds of Topic Maps constraints in many different instances in order to answer questions like: Do they do the same job? Are there some kinds of Topic Maps constraints that are easier to specify with one of them? Do you need different background to use the tools? Is it possible to use them in similar situations (the same topic maps instances)? May we use them to produce an equal result? How do AsTMa!, OSL, Toma, and XTche relate to Topic Maps Constraint Language (TMCL)? What kind of constraints each one of these three can not specify? We will conclude this paper with a summary of the comparisons accomplished between those Topic Maps constraint languages over the use case proposed.
publishDate 2008
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2008
2008-01-01T00:00:00Z
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv conference paper
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/1822/7399
url http://hdl.handle.net/1822/7399
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv INTERNATIONAL COMFERENCE ON TOPIC MAPS RESEARCH AND APPLICATIONS (TMRA), 3, Leipzig, GERMANY, 2007 – “Scaling Topic Maps”. [Leipzig : s.n., 2008].
9783540708735
0302-9743
10.1007/978-3-540-70874-2_10
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Springer Verlag
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Springer Verlag
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)
instname:FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
instacron:RCAAP
instname_str FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
instacron_str RCAAP
institution RCAAP
reponame_str Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)
collection Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) - FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
repository.mail.fl_str_mv info@rcaap.pt
_version_ 1833595601750589440