To check diagram with standard relations

[igrangel]

This document page 72.

[igrangel]

This image, taken from the document above provides quite interesting relations between standards. We should be able to model this by extending the current relatedTo relation into these new relations.

[igrangel]

According to the diagram, the following six different relations can be extracted. These relations have to be checked and the semantics of each one of them should be understood. Generally, they can be subsumed under the relatedTo property. But this is something of which we are still not sure about.

1. IEC_62424(CAEX) isPartOf IEC_62714(AML)
2. IEC_62714(AML) uses MathML
3. SysML follows UML
4. OPC UA usesStructureOf IEC_61804-3(EDDL)
5. ISO_15745 defines IEC_61804-2(EDDL)
6. IEC_61499 hasInfluenceIn IEC_61804-2(EDDL) - prov:wasInfluencedBy ?

[igrangel]

In addition, https://github.com/i40-Tools/StandardOntology/issues/17, B2MML is the implementation of ISA 95, thus: 7. B2MML isImplementationOf ISA_95

[igrangel]

DIN SPEC 16592 hasPredecesor OPC UA
DIN SPEC 16592 hasPredecesor AML

What about to use the prov:wasDerivedFrom from the PROV ontology to express the predecessor?

DIN SPEC 16592 prov:wasDerivedFrom AML
DIN SPEC 16592 prov:wasDerivedFrom OPC UA

[igrangel]

This can be considered as a gold standard for a Standards graph. The aim would be if we can infer some of the existing relations that are in this figure.

[sebbader]

Interessting point, especially as they connect standards to (in my view) technologies. It's UML-only, right? That would imply that we have to import it into our namespace.