Advertisement

An MDE-based method for bridging different design notations

  • Tian Zhang
  • Frédéric Jouault
  • Jean Bézivin
  • Xuandong Li
Original Paper

Abstract

Different communities have developed plenty of design notations for software engineering in support of practical (via UML) and rigorous (via formal methods) approaches. Hence the problem of bridging these notations rises. Model-driven engineering (MDE) is a new paradigm in software engineering, which treats models and model transformations as first class citizens. Furthermore, it is seen as a promising method for bridging heterogeneous platforms. In this paper, we provide an MDE-based approach to build bridges between informal, semi-formal and formal notations: Firstly, different notations are viewed as different domain specification languages (DSLs) and introduced into MDE, especially into the ATLAS Model Management Architecture (AMMA) platform, by metamodeling. Then, ATL transformation rules are built for semantics mapping. At last, TCS-based model-to-text syntax rules are developed, allowing one to map models to programs. Consequently, different design notations in both graphical style and grammatical style are bridged. A case study of bridging OMG SysML™ to LOTOS is also illustrated showing the validity and practicability of our approach.

Keywords

MDE UML Formal methods LOTOS 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    France R, Rumpe B (2007) Model-driven development of complex software: a research roadmap. In: Proceedings of future of software engineering (FoSE) on 29th ICSEGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bezivin J, Jouault F, Rosenthal P, Valduriez P (2004) Modeling in the large and modeling in the small. In: Proceedings of MDAFA 2003/2004. Springer, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Booch G, Brown A, Iyengar S, Rumbaugh J, Selic B (2004) An MDA manifesto, the MDA journal: model driven architecture straight from the masters. Meghan-Kiffer Press, Tamba, USA, pp 133–144Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Modelware Home Page (2007). http://www.modelware-ist.org/index.php
  5. 5.
    Kort J, Klint P, Klusener S et al (2007) Engineering of grammarware. http://www.cs.vu.nl/grammarware/
  6. 6.
    Jouault F, Bezivin J (2006) KM3: a DSL for metamodel specification. In: Proceedings of 8th IFIP international conference on formal methods for open object-based distributed systems. Bologna, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    ATLAS team: ATLAS Transformation Language (ATL) Home page (2006). http://www.eclipse.org/gmt/atl/
  8. 8.
    Jouault F, Bezivin J, Kurtev I (2006) TCS: a DSL for the specification of textual concrete syntaxes in model engineering. In: Proceedings of fifth international conference on generative programming and component engineering (GPCE06). Portland, OregonGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    OMG, OMG Systems Modeling Language, v1.0, formal/2007-09-01 (2007)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    ISO, LOTOS (1989) A formal description technique based on the temporal ordering of observational behaviour. ISO 8807Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    OMG, Meta Object Facility (MOF) Core specification v2.0, formal/06-01-01 (2006)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Parr T (2007) ANTLR v3. Web page: http://antlr.org/v3/index.html
  13. 13.
    OMG, XML Metadata Interchange v2.0, formal/03-05-02 (2003)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    OMG, OMG SysML. Web page: http://www.omgsysml.org (2007)
  15. 15.
    Garavel H, Lang F, Mateescu R (2001) An overview of CADP 2001. RT-254, INRIAGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bowman H, Gomez R (2005) Concurrency theory: calculi and automata for modelling untimed and timed concurrent systems, vol 422. Springer, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    OMG (2004) Human-usable textual notation, v1.0, OMG document, formal/2004-08-01Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Budinsky F, Steinberg D, Ellersick R, Merks E, Brodsky SA, Grose TJ (2003) Eclipse modeling framework. Addison Wesley, ReadingGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    OMG (2004) MOF model to text transformation languageGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Katz S, Grumberg O (2002) A framework for translating models and specifications. In: Proceedings of 3rd international conference on integrated formal methods (IFM 2002). Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Zhang Y (2006) Interface automata based components behavior derivation. Ph.D. Theis, Nanjing UniversityGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tian Zhang
    • 1
  • Frédéric Jouault
    • 2
  • Jean Bézivin
    • 2
  • Xuandong Li
    • 1
  1. 1.State Key Laboratory for Novel Software TechnologyNanjing UniversityNanjingP.R.China
  2. 2.AtlanMod teamINRIA and EMNNantesFrance

Personalised recommendations