of analysis patterns, increasing the quality of reuse.
It is also proposed the documentation of analysis
patterns based in the specification of the main
classes defined during the process.
To exemplify the process of analysis patterns
improvement, it will be used the Parceling of Urban
Land analysis pattern, proposed in Lisboa et al.
(2002). As a technique to the application of
ontological meta-properties, it will be used the
VERONTO (ONTOlogical VERification) developed
by Villela (2004). VERONTO technique is used to
the verification and adequacy of class diagrams of
UML (Unified Modeling Language), based on the
philosophical notions of rigidity, dependency and
identity, defined by Guarino and Welty (2000).
This article is organized as follows. Section 2
describes the VERONTO technique. Section 3
discusses the analysis patterns documentation using
one more topic, which identifies the main classes of
the domain. Section 4 shows the improvement of the
Parceling of Urban Land analysis pattern. Section 5
presents some final considerations.
2 VERONTO TECHNIQUE
The VERONTO technique, proposed by Guarino
and Welty (2000), uses meta-properties as rigidity,
dependence and identity, in the validation of
conceptual models specified through UML class
diagrams. Ontological meta-properties are based on
philosophical notions of essence, dependence and
identity defined by Guarino and Welty.
When developed this technique, Villela et al.
(2004) applied these meta-properties in elements of
the class diagram, making it possible to apply
taxonomic restrictions about the relationship
between classes. Such restrictions are based on
ontological analysis of meta-properties, applied in
the elements of the class diagram.
2.1 Representation of Philosophical
Notions through Ontological
Meta-Properties
The notion of essence is represented by the meta-
property rigidity. The meta-property of rigidity is
about the knowledge of how classes can change in
the course of time and other can’t. A meta-property
is rigid (+R) (~, anti-rigid) when an element of the
domain that instantiates such property will continue
to instantiate it during all its existence (Guarino and
Welty 2000). For example, in a conceptual schema
which specifies an application of urban transport, an
instance of the FAST TRAFFIC ROAD class can
stop being a fast track road to become a local road,
but it will always be a road within the context of the
transportation system. Thus, it is possible to analyze
that the FAST TRAFFIC ROAD class is anti-rigid
(~R), as a fast traffic road will not be like that for all
its existence. However, the ROAD class is rigid
(+R), because in the domain of urban transport
application, an instance of ROAD will be like that
for all its existence.
The philosophical notion of dependence is about
relations of dependency that can be intrinsic and
extrinsic, represented by +D (-D, otherwise)
(Guarino and Welty 2000).
According to Villela et al. (2004) dependency
involves different relationships, such as the ones
existing among people and their parents, being
extrinsic and intrinsic. An intrinsic property is inhe-
rent to the individual, non dependent on other indivi-
duals, like having a heart or a fingerprint. Extrinsic
properties are not inherent and they have a relational
nature, like “being the mayor of the São Paulo City”.
For example, an instance of the DISTRICT SEAT
class is externally dependent on the MUNICI-
PALITY class, as it can only be a district seat if
there is a municipality in which it was created.
At last, identity is about the way we recognize
individual entities, and it is based on the concept of
Identity Condition (IC), proposed by Guarino and
Welty (2000). A class that has an identity condition
is represented by the symbol +O (-O, otherwise),
only if it is rigid and executes an IC (+I) (-I,
otherwise). A non-rigid class can execute an IC, if
and only if this is inherited by a class that has a rigid
meta-property, which subsume it. For example, the
subclass FAST TRAFFIC ROAD, classified as non-
rigid, can only execute its IC’s, inheriting them from
rigid meta-properties that superpose it, as a meta-
property (+O) from the super class ROAD.
The meta-properties described above create some
natural restrictions in the taxonomic structure of
ontology (Guarino and Welty, 2000), supporting the
analysis and adequacy of conceptual models. Be it
two arbitrary classes (Φ and ψ). The notation Φ
M
is
used to show that a class Φ has the meta-property
M
,
with the restrictions showed in Table 1.
Table 1: Taxonomic restrictions (Guarino, 2000).
Meta-Properties Restrictions
Rigidity
φ
~R
can't subsume ψ
+R
Identity
φ
+I
can't subsume ψ
-I
Dependency
φ
+D
can't subsume ψ
-D
IMPROVING ANALYSIS PATTERNS IN THE GEOGRAPHIC DOMAIN USING ONTOLOGICAL
META-PROPERTIES
257