MATA: A Tool for Aspect-Oriented Modeling Based on Graph Transformation

  • Jon Whittle
  • Praveen Jayaraman
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5002)


This paper describes MATA (Modeling Aspects Using a Transfor-mation Approach), a UML aspect-oriented modeling tool that uses graph transformations to specify and compose aspects. Graph transformations provide a unified approach for aspect modeling. The methods presented here can be applied to any modeling language with a well-defined metamodel. This paper, however, focuses on UML class diagrams, sequence diagrams and state diagrams. MATA takes a different approach to aspect-oriented modeling since there are no explicit join points. Rather, any model element can be a join point and composition is a special case of model transformation. We illustrate MATA on structural and behavioral models for a cell phone example.


Nickel Product Line Stein Prefix 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Clarke, S., Baniassad, E.: Aspect-Oriented Analysis and Design: The Theme Approach. Addison Wesley, Reading (2005)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    France, R., Ray, I., Georg, G., Ghosh, S.: Aspect-oriented approach to early design modeling. IEE Proceedings - Software 151, 173–186 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cottenier, T., van den Berg, A., Elrad, T.: Motorola WEAVR: Model Weaving in a Large Industrial Context. In: Aspect-Oriented Software Development (AOSD), Vancouver, Canada (2007)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jacobson, I., Ng, P.-W.: Aspect Oriented Software Development with Use Cases. Addison-Wesley Professional, Reading (2004)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Whittle, J., Moreira, A., Araújo, J., Rabbi, R., Jayaraman, P., Elkhodary, A.: An Expressive Aspect Composition Language for UML State Diagrams. In: Engels, G., Opdyke, B., Schmidt, D.C., Weil, F. (eds.) MODELS 2007. LNCS, vol. 4735, pp. 514–528. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jayaraman, P., Whittle, J., Elkhodary, A., Gomaa, H.: Model Composition in Product Lines and Feature Interaction Detection using Critical Pair Analysis. In: Engels, G., Opdyke, B., Schmidt, D.C., Weil, F. (eds.) MODELS 2007. LNCS, vol. 4735, Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Nickel, U., Niere, J., Zuendorf, A.: The FUJABA Environment. In: International Conference on Software Engineering, Limerick, Ireland, pp. 742–745 (2000)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Csertan, G., Huszerl, G., Majzik, I., Pap, Z., Pataricza, A., Varro, D.: VIATRA - visual automated transformations for formal verification and validation of UML models. In: Automated Software Engineering, 2002 (ASE), Edinburgh, UK, p. 267 (2002)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Heckel, R., Küster, J., Taentzer, G.: Confluence of Typed Attributed Graph Transformation Systems. In: Corradini, A., Ehrig, H., Kreowski, H.-J., Rozenberg, G. (eds.) ICGT 2002. LNCS, vol. 2505, pp. 161–176. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Taentzer, G.: AGG: A Graph Transformation Environment for Modeling and Validation of Software. In: Pfaltz, J.L., Nagl, M., Böhlen, B. (eds.) AGTIVE 2003. LNCS, vol. 3062, pp. 446–453. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Klein, J., Helouet, L., Jézéquel, J.-M.: Semantic-Based Weaving of Scenarios. In: Aspect-Oriented Software Development (AOSD), Vancouver, Canada, pp. 27–38 (2006)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Araújo, J., Whittle, J., Kim, D.-K.: Modeling and Composing Scenario-Based Requirements with Aspects. In: International Conference on Requirements Engineering, Kyoto, Japan, pp. 58–67 (2004)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mahoney, M., Elrad, T.: Generating Code from Scenario and State Based Models to Address Crosscutting Concerns. In: Sixth International Workshop on Scenarios and State Machines (2007)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Stein, D., Hanenberg, S., Unland, R.: Expressing Different Conceptual Models of Join Point Selections in Aspect-Oriented Design. In: Aspect-Oriented Software Development (AOSD), Bonn, Germany, pp. 15–26 (2006)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Nejati, S., Sabetzadeh, M., Chechik, M., Easterbrook, S., Zave, P.: Matching and Merging of Statecharts Specifications. In: International Conference on Software Engineering, pp. 54–64 (2007)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gomaa, H.: Designing Software Product Lines with UML: From Use Cases to Pattern-based Software Architectures. Addison-Wesley Object Technology Series (2005)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Chitchyan, R., Rashid, A., Rayson, P., Waters, R.: Semantics-Based Composition for Aspect-Oriented Requirements Engineering. In: Aspect-Oriented Software Development (AOSD), Vancouver, Canada, pp. 36–48 (2007)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jon Whittle
    • 1
  • Praveen Jayaraman
    • 2
  1. 1.Dept of ComputingLancaster UniversityBailriggUK
  2. 2.Dept. of Information and Software EngineeringGeorge Mason UniversityFairfax

Personalised recommendations