Advertisement

A Generic Role Model for Dynamic Objects

  • Mohamed Dahchour
  • Alain Pirotte
  • Esteban Zimányi
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2348)

Abstract

The role generic relationship for conceptual modeling relates a class of objects (e.g., persons) and classes of roles (e.g., students, employees) for those objects. The relationship is meant to capture temporal aspects of real-world objects while the common generalization relationship deals with their more static aspects. This paper presents a generic role model, where the semantics of roles is defined at both the class and the instance levels. The paper also discusses the interaction between the role relationship and generalization, and it attempts to clarify some of their similarities and differences.

Keywords

Information modeling role model object technology 

References

  1. 1.
    L. Al-Jadir and M. Léonard. If we refuse the inheritance... In T.J.M. Bench-Capon, G. Soda, and A.M. Tjoa, editors, Proc. of the 10th Int. Conf. on Database and Expert Systems Applications, DEXA’99, LNCS 1677, Florence, Italy, 1999. Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    A. Albano, R. Bergamini, G. Ghelli, and R. Orsini. An object data model with roles. In R. Agrawal, S. Baker, and D. Bel, editors, Proc. of the 19th Int. Conf. on Very Large Data Bases, VLDB’93, pages 39–51, Dublin, Ireland, 1993. Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    M. Atkinson, F. Bancilhon, D. Dewitt, K. Dittrich, D. Maier, and S. Zdonik. The object-oriented database system manifesto. In W. Kim, J.-M. Nicolas, and S. Nishi, editors, Proc. of the 1st Int. Conf. on Deductive and Object-Oriented Databases, DOOD’89, pages 223–240, Kyoto, Japan, 1991. North-Holland. Reprinted in the O2 Book, pp. 3–20.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    C. W. Bachman and M. Daya. The role concept in data models. In Proc. of the 3rd Int. Conf. on Very Large Data Bases, VLDB’77, pages 464–476, Tokyo, Japan, 1977. IEEE Computer Society and ACM SIGMOD Record 9(4).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    E. Bertino and G. Guerrini. Objects with multiple most specific classes. In W.G. Olthoff, editor, Proc. of the 9th European Conf. on Object-Oriented Programming, ECOOP’95, LNCS 952, pages 102–126, Aarhus, Denmark, 1995. Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    C. Chambers. Predicate classes. In O. Nierstrasz, editor, Proc. of the 7th European Conf. on Object-Oriented Programming, ECOOP’93, LNCS 707, pages 268–296, Kaiserslautern, Germany, 1993. Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    W. W. Chu and G. Zhang. Associations and roles in object-oriented modeling. In D.W. Embley and R.C. Goldstein, editors, Proc. of the 16th Int. Conf. on Conceptual Modeling, ER’97, LNCS 1331, pages 257–270, Los Angeles, California, 1997. Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    M. Dahchour. Integrating Generic Relationships into Object Models Using Meta-classes. PhD thesis, Department of Computing Science and Engineering, University of Louvain, Belgium, March 2001.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    M. Dahchour, A. Pirotte, and E. Zimányi. Materialization and its metaclass implementation. Technical Report YEROOS TR-9901, IAG-QANT, Université catholique de Louvain, Belgium, February 1999. To be published in IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    N. Edelweiss, J. Palazzo de Oliveira, J. Volkmer de Castilho, E. Peressi, A. Montanari, and B. Pernici. T-ORM: Temporal aspects in objects and roles. In Proc. of the 1st Int. Conf. on Object Role Modeling, ORM-1, 1994.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    D. H. Fishman, D. Beech, H. P. Cate, E. C. Chow, T. Connors, J. W. Davis, N. Derrett, C.G. Hoch, W. Kent, P. Lyngbæk, B. Mahbod, M-A. Neimat, T. A. Ryan, and M-C. Shan. IRIS: An object-oriented database management system. ACM Trans. on Office Information Systems, 5(1):48–69, 1987. Also in Readings in Object-Oriented Database Systems, Morgan-Kaufmann, 1990.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    G. Gottlob, M. Schrefl, and B. Röck. Extending object-oriented systems with roles. ACM Trans. on Office Information Systems, 14(3):268–296, 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    W. Kent. A rigorous model of object reference, identity, and existence. Journal of Object-Oriented Programming, 4(3):28–36, June 1991.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    S. N. Khoshafian and G. P. Copeland. Object identity. In N.K. Meyrowitz, editor, Proc. of the Conf. on Object-Oriented Programming Systems, Languages and Applications, OOPSLA’86, pages 406–416, Portland, Oregon, 1986. ACM SIGPLAN Notices 21(11), 1986.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Q. Li and G. Dong. A framework for object migration in object-oriented databases. Data & Knowledge Engineering, 13(3):221–242, 1994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    E. Odberg. Category classes: Flexible classification and evolution in object-oriented databases. In G. Wijers, S. Brinkkemper, and T. Wasserman, editors, Proc. of the 6th Int. Conf. on Advanced Information Systems Engineering, CAiSE’94, LNCS 811, pages 406–420, Utrecht, The Netherlands, 1994. Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    M. P. Papazoglou and B. J. Krämer. A database model for object dynamics. Very Large Data Bases Journal, 6:73–96, 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    B. Pernici. Objects with roles. In Proc. of the Conf. on Office Information Systems, pages 205–215, Cambridge, MA, 1990.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    D. W. Renouf and B. Henderson-Sellers. Incorporating roles into MOSES. In C. Mingins and B. Meyer, editors, Proc. of the 15th Conf. on Technology of Object-Oriented Languages and Systems, TOOLS 15, pages 71–82, 1995.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    J. Richardson and P. Schwarz. Aspects: Extending objects to support multiple, independent roles. In J. Clifford and R. King, editors, Proc. of the ACM SIG-MOD Int. Conf. on Management of Data, SIGMOD’91, pages 298–307, Denver, Colorado, 1991. SIGMOD Record 20(2).Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    E. Sciore. Object specialization. ACM Trans. on Office Information Systems, 7(2):103–122, 1989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    F. Steimann. On the representation of roles in object-oriented and conceptual modeling. Data & Knowledge Engineering, 35(1):83–106, October 2000.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    R. J. Wieringa and W. de Jonge. The identification of objects and roles: Object identifiers revisited. Technical Report IR-267, Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, December 1991.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    R. J. Wieringa, W. De Jonge, and P. Spruit. Using dynamic classes and role classes to model object migration. Theory and Practice of Object Systems, 1(1):61–83, 1995.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    R. K. Wong, H. L. Chau, and F.H. Lochovsky. A data model and semantics of objects with dynamic roles. In A. Gray and P.-A. Larson, editors, Proc. of the 13th Int. Conf. on Data Engineering, ICDE’97, pages 402–411, Birmingham, UK, 1997. IEEE Computer Society.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mohamed Dahchour
    • 1
  • Alain Pirotte
    • 1
  • Esteban Zimányi
    • 2
  1. 1.IAG School of Management, Information Systems Unit (ISYS)University of LouvainLouvain-la-NeuveBelgium
  2. 2.Informatics DepartmentUniversity of BrusselsBrusselsBelgium

Personalised recommendations