The View-Constraint Duality in Database Systems, Software Engineering, and Systems Engineering

  • John A. Springer
  • Edward L. Robertson
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5333)


In database systems, software engineering, and systems engineering, the concepts of constraints and views are commonly and effectively used. Considered distinct, they stand as well-established notions in each domain’s body of knowledge. The focus of this paper is to explore the duality between views and constraints in these domains and investigate the efficacy of this duality in enabling more effective model interoperability. We provide empirical evidence for the duality and demonstrate cases where the duality is useful for constraint specification across modeling paradigms as commonly occurs across multiple organizations.


Production Schedule Transitive Closure Enterprise Architecture Abstract Task Master Production 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Zachman, J.A.: A framework for information systems architecture. IBM Systems Journal 26(3) (1987); IBM Publication G321-5298Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Abiteboul, S., Hull, R., Vianu, V.: Foundations of Databases. Addison-Wesley, New York (1995)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Garcia-Molina, H., Ullman, J.D., Widom, J.: Database Systems: The Complete Book. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River (2002)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Springer, J.A., Robertson, E.L.: The view-constraint duality in database systems, software engineering, and systems engineering. Technical Report TBD, Computer Science Department, Indiana University (July 2008)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    IEEE: IEEE Std 1471-2000, IEEE Recommended Practice for Architectural Descriptions of Software Intensive Systems. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, New York, USA (2000)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    ISO: ISO 14258: Industrial automation systems – Concepts and rules for enterprise models. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland (2000)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Springer, J.A.: View-Constraint Duality in Databases and Systems Engineering. PhD thesis, Indiana University, Computer Science Department (August 2007)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Immerman, N.: Languages that capture complexity classes. SIAM Journal on Computing 16(4), 760–778 (1987)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wyss, C.M., Robertson, E.L.: Relational languages for metadata integration. ACM Trans. Database Syst. 30(2), 624–660 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ward, P.T., Mellor, S.J.: Structured Development for Real-Time Systems. Prentice Hall Professional Technical Reference (1991)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Popkin Software: Popkin Enterprise Architecture Framework (visited 4/23/2006),
  12. 12.
    Portougal, V., Sundaram, D.: Business Processes: Operational Solutions for SAP Implementation. Idea Group Publishing (2005)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Portougal, V.: XXIII: ERP Implementation for Production Planning at EA Cakes Ltd. In: Cases on Information Technology: Lessons Learned, vol. 7, Idea Group Publishing (2006)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Russell, R., Taylor, B.W.: Operations Management: Quality and Competitiveness in a Global Environment, 5th edn. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Chichester (2006)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Pressman, R.S.: Software Engineering: A Practitioner’s Approach. McGraw-Hill Science/Engineering/Math. (2004)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • John A. Springer
    • 1
  • Edward L. Robertson
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Computer and Information TechnologyPurdue UniversityWest LafayetteUSA
  2. 2.Computer Science DepartmentIndiana UniversityBloomingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations