Use of Models and Modelling Techniques for Service Development

  • Luís Ferreira Pires
  • Marten van Sinderen
  • Cléver Ricardo Guareis de Farias
  • João Paulo Andrade Almeida
Part of the IFIP International Federation for Information Processing book series (IFIPAICT, volume 139)


E-applications are increasingly being composed from individual services that can be realized with different technologies, such as, e.g., Web Services and standard component technologies. A current trend in the development of these services is to describe their technology-independent and technology-specific aspects in separate models. A prominent development that leads this trend is the Model-Driven Architecture (MDA). An important feature of the MDA approach is the explicit identification of Platform-Independent Models (PIMs) and the flexibility to implement them on different platforms via Platform-Specific Models (PSMs), possibly through (automated) model transformations. A platform can be any technology that supports the execution of these models, either directly or after translation to code in a programming language. This paper aims at identifying the benefits of the MDA approach in the development of services for e-applications. The paper presents a short introduction to MDA, in the context of service development, and an overview of the modelling capabilities of the Unified Modelling Language (UML), one of MDA’s main modelling languages.


Service-oriented development Model Driven Architecture Unified Modeling Language 


  1. 1.
    Almeida, J.P.A., Sinderen, M. van, Ferreira Pires, L. and Quartel, D.: A systematic approach to platform-independent design based on the service concept. In: 7th IEEE Intl. Enterprise Distributed Object Computing (EDOC) Conference, Sept. 2003, pp. 112–123.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Almeida, J.P.A., Sinderen, M. van, Ferreira Pires, L. and Wegdam, M.: Handling QoS in MDA: a discussion on availability and dynamic reconfiguration. In: Workshop on Model Driven Architecture: Foundations and Application (MDAFA) 2003, CTIT Technical Report TR-CTIT-03-27, University of Twente, The Netherlands, June 2003, 91–96.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    De Farias, C.R.G.: Architectural Design of Groupware Systems: a Component-Based Approach. PhD thesis, University of Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands, 2002.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dijkman, R.M., Quartel, D., Ferreira Pires, L. and Sinderen, M. van: An Approach to Relate Viewpoints and Modeling Languages. In: 7th IEEE Enterprise Distributed Object Computing (EDOC) Conference, Sept. 2003, pp. 14–27.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Harel, D. and Rumpe, B.: Modelling Languages: Syntax, Semantics and All That Stuff. Technical Report, The Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot, Israel, MCS00-16, 2000.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Guizzardi, G., Ferreira Pires, L. and van Sinderen, M.: On the role of Domain Ontologies in the Design of Domain-Specific Visual Languages. In: 2nd Workshop on Domain-Specific Visual Languages, ACM OOPSLA, 2002.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    International Telecommunications Union (ITU): Open Distributed Processing Reference Model. Part 1 — Overview. ITU Rec. X.901 ISO/IEC 10746-1, Geneva, 1997.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    International Telecommunications Union(ITU): SDL Formal Semantics Definition. ITU Rec. Z.100, Annex F, Geneva, 2000.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jacobson, I., Booch, G. and Rumbaugh, J.: The unified software development process. Addison Wesley, USA, 1999.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Object Management Group: MDA Guide Version 1.0. May 2003.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Object Management Group: Meta Object Facility (MOF) 2.0 Core Proposal. April 2003.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Object Management Group: Meta Object Facility (MOF) Specification 1.4. April 2002.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Object Management Group: Model Driven Architecture (MDA). July 2001.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Object Management Group: OMG Unified Modelling Language Specification, version 1.4. September 2001.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Object Management Group: OMG XML Metadata Interchange (XMI) Specification, Version 1.2, January 2002.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Object Management Group: UML 2.0 Infrastructure Specification. September 2003.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Object Management Group: UML 2.0 Superstructure Specification. August 2003.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Object Management Group: Unified Modeling Language Specification, version 1.5. March 2003.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Quartel, D.A.C.: Action relations. Basic design concepts for behaviour modelling and refinement. CTIT Ph.D-thesis series, no. 98-18, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands, 1998.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mellor, S.J. and Balcer, M.J.: Executable UML. A foundation for the Model-Driven Architecture. Addison-Wesley, 2002.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mellor, S.J., Tockey, S., Arthaud, R. and Leblanc, P.: Software-platform-independent precise action specification for UML. White paper.

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Luís Ferreira Pires
  • Marten van Sinderen
  • Cléver Ricardo Guareis de Farias
  • João Paulo Andrade Almeida

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations