More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/

Article

Basic operations over models containing subset and union properties

Authors:

Ivan PorresAuthors Info & Claims

MoDELS'06: Proceedings of the 9th international conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems

Pages 469 - 483

https://doi.org/10.1007/11880240_33

Published: 01 October 2006 Publication History

Abstract

The Meta Object Facility 2.0 and Unified Modeling Language 2.0 Infrastructure standards present novel metamodeling constructs called subset and union properties. However, they do not provide a complete definition of these constructs. This definition is necessary to construct modeling tools and to ensure their interoperability. In this article, we present the basic model operations over models containing subset and union properties. These operations are formalized using pre- and postconditions using substitutability as the main criterion for language specialization.

References

[1]

Marcus Alanen and Ivan Porres. Subset and union properties in modeling languages. Technical Report 731, TUCS, Dec 2005.

[2]

Antonio Albano, Giorgio Ghelli, and Renzo Orsini. A Relationship Mechanism for a Strongly Typed Object-Oriented Database Programming Language. In Proceedings of the 17th Conference on Very Large Databases, Morgan Kaufman pubs. (Los Altos CA), Barcelona, 1991.

Digital Library

[3]

José Álvarez, Andy Evans, and Paul Sammut. MML and the Metamodel Architecture. In Jon Whittle, editor, WTUML: Workshop on Transformation in UML 2001, April 2001.

[4]

Carsten Amelunxen, Tobias Rötschke, and Andy Schürr. Graph Transformations with MOF 2.0. In Holger Giese and Albert Zündorf, editors, Fujaba Days 2005, September 2005.

[5]

Thomas Baar. Metamodels without Metacircularities. L'Objet, 9(4):95-114, 2003.

[6]

Gavin Bierman and Alisdair Wren. First-class relationships in an object-oriented language. In Workshop on Foundations of Object-Oriented Languages (FOOL 2005), January 2005.

Digital Library

[7]

Frank Budinsky, David Steinberg, Ed Merks, Raymond Ellersick, and Timothy J. Grose. Eclipse Modeling Framework. Addison Wesley Professional, August 2003.

Digital Library

[8]

Giuseppe Castagna. Covariance and Contravariance: Conflict without a Cause. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, 17(3):431-447, May 1995.

Digital Library

[9]

Tony Clark, Andy Evans, and Stuart Kent. The Metamodelling Language Calculus: Foundation Semantics for UML. In H. Hussmann, editor, Fundamental Approaches to Software Engineering. 4th International Conference, FASE 2001, volume 2029 of LNCS, pages 17-31, 2001.

Digital Library

[10]

B.A. Davey and H.A. Priestley. Introduction to Lattices and Order. Cambridge University Press, 2002.

[11]

Anneke Kleppe, April 2003. Discussion on the mailing-list [email protected].

[12]

Ulrich A. Nickel, Jörg Niere, and Albert Zündorf. Tool demonstration: The FUJABA environment. In Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), pages 742-745. ACM Press, 2000.

Digital Library

[13]

OMG. MOF 2.0 Query / View / Transformation Final Adopted Specification. OMG Document ptc/05-11-01, available at www.omg.org, 2005.

[14]

OMG. UML 2.0 Superstructure Specification, August 2005. Document formal/05-07-04. Available at http://www.omg.org/.

[15]

OMG. Meta Object Facility (MOF) Core Specification, version 2.0, January 2006. Document formal/06-01-01, available at http://www.omg.org/.

[16]

OMG. UML 2.0 Infrastructure Specification, March 2006. Document formal/05-07-05, available at http://www.omg.org/.

[17]

Markus Scheidgen. On ImplementingMOF 2.0--New Features forModelling Language Abstractions. July 2005. Available at http://www.informatik.hu-berlin.de/~scheidge/.

[18]

Dániel Varró and András Pataricza. VPM: A visual, precise and multilevel metamodeling framework for describing mathematical domains and UML. Journal of Software and Systems Modeling, 2(3):187-210, October 2003.

Digital Library

Cited By

Costal DGómez CGuizzardi G(2011)Formal semantics and ontological analysis for understanding subsetting, specialization and redefinition of associations in UMLProceedings of the 30th international conference on Conceptual modeling10.5555/2075144.2075164(189-203)Online publication date: 31-Oct-2011
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/2075144.2075164
Bendix LEmanuelsson P(2009)Requirements for Practical Model Merge --- An Industrial PerspectiveProceedings of the 12th International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems10.1007/978-3-642-04425-0_13(167-180)Online publication date: 1-Oct-2009
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/978-3-642-04425-0_13

Recommendations

A mapping language from models to DI diagrams
MoDELS'06: Proceedings of the 9th international conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems

The OMG MOF 2.0 standard is used to define the abstract syntax of software modeling languages while the UML 2.0 Diagram Interchange (DI) describes the concrete syntax of models. However, very few tools support the DI standard, leading to ...
Specifications, not meta-models
GaMMa '06: Proceedings of the 2006 international workshop on Global integrated model management

In a model-driven development, software engineers will have to manage multiple artifacts expressed in several languages. Current meta-modelling and concrete syntax standards fail to adequately preserve a link between artifacts and the languages in which ...
Diagram definition: a case study with the UML class diagram
MODELS'11: Proceedings of the 14th international conference on Model driven engineering languages and systems

The abstract syntax of a graphical modeling language is typically defined with a metamodel while its concrete syntax (diagram) is informally defined with text and figures. Recently, the Object Management Group (OMG) released a beta specification, called ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

MoDELS'06: Proceedings of the 9th international conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems

October 2006

795 pages

ISBN:3540457720

Editors:
Oscar Nierstrasz
Software Composition Group, University of Bern, Switzerland
,
Jon Whittle
Computing Department - InfoLab21, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK
,
David Harel
Department of Computer Science and Applied Mathematics, The Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot, Israel
,
Gianna Reggio
DISI, Università di Genova, Rehovot, Italy

Sponsors

IEEE-CS\DATC: The IEEE Computer Society
SIGSOFT: ACM Special Interest Group on Software Engineering
DISI - Universita di Genova: Dipartimento di Informatica e Scienze dell'Informazione

Publisher

Springer-Verlag

Berlin, Heidelberg

Publication History

Published: 01 October 2006

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Article

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 144 of 506 submissions, 28%

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

2
Total Citations
View Citations
0
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)0
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

Reflects downloads up to 15 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Costal DGómez CGuizzardi G(2011)Formal semantics and ontological analysis for understanding subsetting, specialization and redefinition of associations in UMLProceedings of the 30th international conference on Conceptual modeling10.5555/2075144.2075164(189-203)Online publication date: 31-Oct-2011
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/2075144.2075164
Bendix LEmanuelsson P(2009)Requirements for Practical Model Merge --- An Industrial PerspectiveProceedings of the 12th International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems10.1007/978-3-642-04425-0_13(167-180)Online publication date: 1-Oct-2009
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/978-3-642-04425-0_13

View Options

View options

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents