Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Research Agenda for Conceptual Schema-Centric Development

  • Chapter
Conceptual Modelling in Information Systems Engineering

Abstract

Conceptual schema-centric development (CSCD) is a research goal that reformulates the historical aim of automating information systems development. In CSCD, conceptual schemas would be explicit, executable in the production environment and the basis for the system’s evolution. To achieve the CSCD goal, several research problems must be solved. In this paper we identify and comment on sixteen problems that should be included in a research agenda for CSCD.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Akoka, J., Comyn-Wattiau, I.: Entity-relationship and object-oriented model automatic clustering. Data & Knowledge Engineering, 20, 1996, pp. 87–117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Basili, V., Briand, L.C., Melo, W.: How reuse influences productivity in object-oriented systems. Communications of the ACM 39(10), 1996, pp. 104–116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Boman, M., Bubenko, J.A. jr., Johannesson, P., Wangler, B.: Conceptual Modelling. Prentice Hall, 1997, p. 269

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bernstein, P.A.: Applying Model Management to Classical Meta Data Problems. In Proc. CIDR 2003, pp. 209–220

    Google Scholar 

  5. Banerjee, J., Kim, W., Kim, H-J., Korth, H.F.: Semantics and Implementation of Schema Evolution in Object-Oriented Databases. In Proc. ACM SIGMOD 1987, pp. 311–322

    Google Scholar 

  6. Batini, C., Lenzerini, M., Navathe S.B.: A Comparative Analysis of Methodologies for Database Schema Integration. ACM Comput. Surv. 18(4), 1986, pp. 323–364

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Borgida, A., Mylopoulos, J., Reiter, R.: On the frame problem in procedure specifications. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 21, 1995, pp. 785–798

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. BRCommunity.com (Eds.): A Brief History of the Business Rule Approach. Business Rules Journal, 6(1), January 2005

    Google Scholar 

  9. Brinkkemper, S., Lindencrona, E., Sølvberg, A. (Eds.): Information Systems Engineering. State of the Art and Research Themes, Springer, 2000

    Google Scholar 

  10. Calvanese, D., Lenzerini, M., Nardi, D.: Description Logics for Conceptual Data Modeling. In Chomicki, J., Saake, G. (Eds.): Logics for Databases and Information Systems. Kluwer, 1998, pp. 229–263

    Google Scholar 

  11. Castano, S., de Antonellis, V., Fugini, M.G., Pernici, B.: Conceptual Schema Analysis: Techniques and Applications. ACM TODS, 23(3), 1998, pp. 286–333

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Ceri, S.; Fraternalli, P.; Paraboschi, S.; Tanca, L. “Automatic Generation of Production Rules for Integrity Maintenance”. ACM TODS, 19(3), 1994, pp. 367–422

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Cabot, J., Teniente, E.: Incremental Evaluation of OCL Constraints. In Proc. CAiSE 2006, LNCS 4001, pp. 81–95

    Google Scholar 

  14. Chen, P., Thalheim, B., Wong, L.Y.: Future Directions of Conceptual Modeling. In Proc. ER 1997, LNCS 1565, pp. 287–301

    Google Scholar 

  15. Davis, K.H., Aiken, P.H.: Data Reverse Engineering: A Historical Survey. In Proc. Working Conference on Reverse Engineering, 2000, pp. 70–78

    Google Scholar 

  16. DeRemer, F., Kron, H.: Programming-in-the-Large Versus Programming-in-the-Small. IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 2(2), 1976, pp. 80–86

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  17. Egyed, A. Instant consistency checking for the UML. In Proc. ICSE 2006, pp. 381–390

    Google Scholar 

  18. Eshuis, R., Jansen, D.N., Wieringa, R.: Requirements-Level Semantics and Model Checking of Object-Oriented Statecharts. Requirements Engineering 7(4), 2002, pp. 243–263

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Fowler, M.: Refactoring: Improving the design of existing code. Addison-Wesley, 1998, p. 464

    Google Scholar 

  20. Gogolla, M., Bohling, J., Richters, M.: Validation of UML and OCL Models by Automatic Snapshot Generation. In Proc. UML 2003, LNCS 2863, pp. 265–279

    Google Scholar 

  21. Gómez, C., Olivé, A.: Evolving Derived Entity Types in Conceptual Schemas in the UML. In Proc. OOIS 2003, LNCS 2817, pp. 33–45

    Google Scholar 

  22. Gupta, A., Mumick, I. S.: Materialized Views. Techniques, Implementations and Applications. The MIT Press, 1999

    Google Scholar 

  23. Gupta, H., Mumick, I.S.: Selection of Views to Materialize in a Data Warehouse. IEEE Trans on Knowledge and data engineering, 17(1), 2005, pp. 24–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Gupta, A., Mumick, I.S., Ross, K.A.: Adapting Materialized Views after Redefinitions. In Proc. ACM SIGMOD 1995, pp. 211–222

    Google Scholar 

  25. Harel, D.: Biting the Silver Bullet. Toward a Brighter Future for System Development. Computer, January 1992, pp. 8–20

    Google Scholar 

  26. Hick, J-M., Hainaut, J-L.: Strategy for Database Application Evolution: The DB-MAIN Approach. In Proc. ER 2003, LNCS 2813, pp. 291–306

    Google Scholar 

  27. ISO/TC97/SC5/WG3: Concepts and Terminology for the Conceptual Schema and the Information Base, J.J. Van Griethuysen (Ed.), March 1982

    Google Scholar 

  28. Lindland, O.I., Sindre, G., Sølvberg, A.: Understanding Quality in Conceptual Modeling. IEEE Software, March 1994, pp. 42–49

    Google Scholar 

  29. Mays, R.G. “Forging a silver bullet from the essence of software”. IBM Systems Journal, 33(1), 1994, pp. 20–45

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  30. Mellor, S.J., Balcer, M.J.: Executable UML. A Foundation for Model-Driven Architecture. Addison-Wesley, 2002, p. 368

    Google Scholar 

  31. Mens, T., Tourwé, T.: A Survey of Software Refactoring. IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 30(2), 2004, pp. 126–139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Moody, D.L., Sindre, G., Brasethvik, T., Sølvberg, A.: Evaluating the Quality of Process Models: Empirical Testing of a Quality Framework. In Proc. ER 2002, LNCS 2503, pp. 214–231

    Google Scholar 

  33. Moody, D.L., Sindre, G., Brasethvik, T., Sølvberg, A.: Evaluating the quality of information models: empirical testing of a conceptual model quality framework. In Proc. ICSE 2003, pp. 295–307

    Google Scholar 

  34. Mylopoulos, J.: The Role of Knowledge Representation in the Development of Specifications. In Proc IFIP 1986, pp. 317–319

    Google Scholar 

  35. Mylopoulos, J.: Information Modeling in the Time of the Revolution. Information Systems 23(3/4), 1998, pp. 127–155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Olivé, A.: Derivation Rules in Object-Oriented Conceptual Modeling Languages. In Proc. CAiSE 2003, LNCS 2681, pp. 404–420

    Google Scholar 

  37. Olivé, A.: Conceptual Schema-Centric Development: A Grand Challenge for Information Systems Research. In Proc. CAiSE 2005. LNCS 3520, pp. 1–15

    Google Scholar 

  38. Parent, C., Spaccapietra, S.: Issues and approaches of database integration. Communications of the ACM 41(5), 1998, pp. 166–178

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Pottinger, R., Bernstein, P.A.: Merging Models Based on Given Correspondences. In Proc VLDB 2003, pp. 826–873

    Google Scholar 

  40. Rahm, E., Bernstein P.A.: A survey of approaches to automatic schema matching. VLDB Journal 10(4), 2001, pp. 334–350

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  41. Rich, C., Waters, R.C.: Automatic Programming: Myths and Prospects. Computer, August 1988, pp. 40–51

    Google Scholar 

  42. Ross, R.G. (Ed.): The Business Rules Manifesto. Business Rules Group. Version 2.0, November 2003

    Google Scholar 

  43. Schumann, J. M.: Automated Theorem Proving in Software Engineering, Springer, 2001, p. 228

    Google Scholar 

  44. Schewe, K-D., Thalheim, B.: Towards a theory of consistency enforcement. Acta Informática 36, 1999, pp. 97–141

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  45. Shaw, M.: Software Engineering Education: A Roadmap. In Future of Software Engineering, Proc ICSE 2000, pp. 371–380

    Google Scholar 

  46. Shoval, P., Danoch, R., Balabam, M.: Hierarchical entity-relationship diagrams: the model, method of creation and experimental evaluation. Requirements Eng., 2004, 9, pp. 217–228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Sølvberg, A.: Co-operative Concept Modeling. In Lindencrona, E., Sølvberg, A. (Eds.): State of the Art and Research Themes, Springer, 2000 [9], pp. 305–326

    Google Scholar 

  48. Sowa, J.F.: Knowledge Representation. Logical, Philosophical and Computational Foundations. Brooks/Cole, 2000, p. 594

    Google Scholar 

  49. Stumptner, M., Schrefl, M., Grossmann, G.: On the road to behavior-based integration. In Proc. APCCM 2004, pp. 15–22

    Google Scholar 

  50. Steimann, F., Kühne, T.: Coding for the Code. ACM Queue, 3(10), 2006, pp. 45–51

    Google Scholar 

  51. Teichroew, D., Sayani, H.: Automation of System Building. Datamation, 17(16), 1971, pp. 25–30

    Google Scholar 

  52. Teniente, E., Urpí, T.: On the abductive or deductive nature of database schema validation and update processing problems. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 3(3), 2003, pp. 287–327

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  53. Tonella, P., Potrich, A.: Reverse Engineering of Object Oriented Code. Springer, 2005, p. 210

    Google Scholar 

  54. Türker, C., Gertz, M.: Semantic integrity support in SQL: 1999 and commercial (object-)relational database management systems. VLDB Journal, 10, 2001, pp. 241–269

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  55. Wand, Y., Weber, R.: Research Commentary: Information Systems and Conceptual Modeling — A Research Agenda. Information Systems Research, 13(4), 2002, pp. 363–376

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Wieringa, R.: A survey of structured and object-oriented software specification methods and techniques. ACM Computing Surveys 30, 1998, pp. 459–527

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Zhang, Y.: Test-Driven Modeling for Model-Driven Development. IEEE Software, September/October 2004, pp. 80–86

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, Spain

    Antoni Olivé

  2. Universitat Oberta de Catalunya, Spain

    Jordi Cabot

Authors
  1. Antoni Olivé
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jordi Cabot
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. NTNU and SINTEF, Sem Sælandsvei 7-9, 7491, Trondheim, Norway

    John Krogstie

  2. Department of Information Science and Media Studies, University of Bergen, Fosswinckelsgate 6, 5007, Bergen, Norway

    Andreas Lothe Opdahl

  3. Department of Information and Computing Sciences, Universiteit Utrecht, Centrumgebouw Noord, office B229 Padualaan 14, De Uithof, 3584CH, Utrecht, The Netherlands

    Sjaak Brinkkemper

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2007 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Olivé, A., Cabot, J. (2007). A Research Agenda for Conceptual Schema-Centric Development. In: Krogstie, J., Opdahl, A.L., Brinkkemper, S. (eds) Conceptual Modelling in Information Systems Engineering. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-72677-7_20

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-72677-7_20

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-72676-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-72677-7

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation