in

The ORM Foundation

Get the facts!

CML (context modelling language)

Last post Sun, Aug 23 2015 6:13 by Ken Evans. 6 replies.
Page 1 of 1 (7 items)
Sort Posts: Previous Next
  • Tue, Aug 18 2015 5:57

    CML (context modelling language)

     hi, just would like to post a ORM based CML stencil for visio

     feel free to use 

  • Tue, Aug 18 2015 6:02 In reply to

    Re: CML (context modelling language)

     https://www.dropbox.com/s/4lmnkbmth19eqdt/CML-stencilV0.1.vssx?dl=0

  • Tue, Aug 18 2015 14:50 In reply to

    • Ken Evans
    • Top 10 Contributor
      Male
    • Joined on Sun, Nov 18 2007
    • Stickford, UK
    • Posts 661

    Re: CML (context modelling language)

    Thanks for your contribution.

    Please explain how you see the relationship between what you call "Context Modeling Language" and ORM.

    You might start by explaining what you mean by "Context Modeling Language".

    • Is there a book or a paper about it?
    • Why should people use it?

     

     

    Since not everyone has a Dropbox account, you should provide your information is such a way that it can referenced without the user being required to log in to a third party service.

     

  • Wed, Aug 19 2015 4:06 In reply to

    Re: CML (context modelling language)

     there are a few good papers mentioning this :

    1) Modelling Context Information with ORM⋆

     by Karen Henricksen1, Jadwiga Indulska2, and Ted McFadden1 

    2)  Tool Support for Designing CML Based Context Models in Pervasive Computing

    by Johnson Fong1, 2, Jadwiga Indulska1, 2 and Ricky Robinson1, 2

    ** CML is an extension of ORM in modelling database application for context-aware application.

  • Wed, Aug 19 2015 16:05 In reply to

    • Ken Evans
    • Top 10 Contributor
      Male
    • Joined on Sun, Nov 18 2007
    • Stickford, UK
    • Posts 661

    Re: CML (context modelling language)

    Thanks for the clarification.
    I read the Henriksen paper some years ago.

    The paper uses the term "context aware" but neither the paper nor the references provide a usable definition of the term.

    The diagrams in the paper are just informal sketches.

    Thus, I'd call the paper "confusing" rather than "good".

  • Wed, Aug 19 2015 18:23 In reply to

    Re: CML (context modelling language)

     and i can agree with that, i did refer to the paper for gaining some technical insight on context modelling,

    as for definition, i would suggest Dey et.al, in their paper 

    Towards a Better Understanding of Context and
    Context-Awareness
    Anind K. Dey and Gregory D. Abowd
  • Sun, Aug 23 2015 6:13 In reply to

    • Ken Evans
    • Top 10 Contributor
      Male
    • Joined on Sun, Nov 18 2007
    • Stickford, UK
    • Posts 661

    Re: CML (context modelling language)

    Thanks. I downloaded the paper from ftp://ftp.cc.gatech.edu/pub/gvu/tr/1999/99-22.pdf

    After reading the paper several times I don't feel I'm any closer to understanding what the authors are trying to say.

    As I see it, all applications use the sequence: input>process>output  and what the authors are calling "context" seems to refer to data that changes with each "situation".  At this level, you could claim that most if not all computing devices meet this requirement.
    For example, you could claim that "situation" of  Jaquard's loom of 1801 was the design of the cloth that the programmers entered into the punched cards and each new design requirement was a new "situation".   

    The paper reminded me of the points that Hyakawa made about abstractions in his book "Language in Thought and Action"
    To be meaningful, nouns and noun phrases must (eventually) point to something in the physical world.
    If the noun is an abstraction, then the abstraction must be based on something that is physically identfiable outside the realm of language.
    Hayakawa uses the example of "Bessie the Cow" that is called an "Asset" by the farmer's accountant.

    Hayakawa also exposes the emptiness of using words to define other words.
    You can see this in the paper in the form of claims that "Our definition is better than their definition" and "This taxonomy is better than that taxonomy".

    Anthropomorhism is another problem. "Awareness" is a characteristic of living things- not of inanimate computer systems.    

    The Sokal Hoax  also came to mind where Alan Sokal used convoluted prose to appeal to the mindset of a publisher.   

Page 1 of 1 (7 items)
© 2008-2015 The ORM Foundation: A UK not-for-profit organisation -------------- Terms of Service