This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here
Difference between revisions of "Candidate Mapping Notations"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
The Open Mapping Language definition is now available for review. | The Open Mapping Language definition is now available for review. | ||
| − | Download the review pack at [[Media:OpenMappingLanguageReviewPack.zip | + | Download the review pack at [[Media:OpenMappingLanguageReviewPack.zip]]. |
| + | |||
| + | |||
A Preliminary assessment of the two OMG languages is given in [[Media:OMGMapping.doc]]. | A Preliminary assessment of the two OMG languages is given in [[Media:OMGMapping.doc]]. | ||
Revision as of 10:25, 23 July 2010
At July 2010, three candidate notations have been identified for evaluation:
- The Open Mapping Language, based on that used by the mapping and transformation tools on the HL7 GForge site
- The OMG QVT (Query-Verify-Transform) languages, defined in the QVT Specification
- The OMG MDMI (Model Based Message Interoperability) language, defined at MDMI Consortium
The Open Mapping Language definition is now available for review.
Download the review pack at Media:OpenMappingLanguageReviewPack.zip.
A Preliminary assessment of the two OMG languages is given in Media:OMGMapping.doc.
XSLT is another possibility, but is currently not being considered as it is usually not easy to read and understand. Proprietary structure-to-structure (S2S) mapping notations, such as that in Altova’s MapForce, are not being considered because they do not support semantic mapping.
