Defining Abstract Graph Views as Module Interfaces

  • Ulrike Ranger
  • Katja Gruber
  • Marc Holze
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5088)


Graph transformation languages offer the ability to model the structure and behavior of a software system visually. While providing extensive language constructs for specifying in the small, they lack sophisticated concepts for specifying in the large. In particular, a mature module concept is still missing. In our project, we develop appropriate concepts and extend the graph transformation languages PROGRES and Fujaba for these concepts. By now, we have already included a mechanism for exporting and importing module interfaces consisting of a subset of specification elements.

In this paper, we extend our module concept for supporting updateable abstract graph views as module interfaces. These views may abstract from specification details allowing a convenient usage of modules. For this purpose, a unique mapping between view elements and specification elements has to be defined. Exported view elements may be used by other modules in the same way as locally-defined specification elements.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Schürr, A.: Operationales Spezifizieren mit programmierten Graphersetzungssystemen. Deutscher Universitäts-Verlag, Wiesbaden (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fischer, T., Niere, J., Torunski, L., Zündorf, A.: Story diagrams: A new graph rewrite language based on the Unified Modelling Language and Java. In: [17], pp. 296–309Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Tanenbaum, A., Steen, M.V.: Distributed Systems – Pinciples and Paradigms, 2nd edn. Prentice Hall PTR, Upper Saddle River (2006)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ranger, U., Schultchen, E., Mosler, C.: Specifying distributed graph transformation systems. In: Zündorf, A., Varró, D. (eds.) GraBaTs 2006. ECEASST, vol. 1 (2006)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Winter, A.: Visuelles Programmieren mit Graphtransformationen. Aachener Beiträge zur Informatik, vol. 27. Wissenschaftsverlag, Mainz (2000)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ranger, U., Hermes, T.: Ensuring consistency in distributed graph transformation systems. In: Dwyer, M.B., Lopes, A. (eds.) FASE 2007. LNCS, vol. 4422, pp. 368–382. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ranger, U.: Visuelle Modellierung von verteilten Systemen mit Graphersetzungssprachen (to appear, 2008)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ermel, C., Rudolf, M., Taentzer, G.: The AGG approach: Language and environment. In: [18], pp. 551–603Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Date, C.J., Darwen, H.: A Guide to the SQL Standard, 3rd edn. Addison Wesley, Boston (1993)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gottlob, G., Paolini, P., Zicari, R.: Properties and update semantics of consistent views. ACM Transactions on Database Systems 13(4), 486–524 (1988)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jakob, J., Königs, A., Schürr, A.: Non-materialized model view specification with triple graph grammars. In: Corradini, A., Ehrig, H., Montanari, U., Ribeiro, L., Rozenberg, G. (eds.) ICGT 2006. LNCS, vol. 4178, pp. 321–335. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Heckel, R., Hoffmann, B., Knirsch, P., Kuske, S.: Simple modules for GRACE. In: [17], pp. 383–395Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Taentzer, G., Schürr, A.: DIEGO, Another step towards a module concept for graph transformation systems. In: Corradini, A., Montanari, U. (eds.) SEGRAGRA 1995. ENTCS, vol. 2. Elsevier Science Publishers, Amsterdam (1995)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Große-Rhode, M., Parisi-Presicce, F., Simeoni, M., Taentzer, G.: Modeling distributed systems by modular graph transformation based on refinement via rule expressions. In: Münch, M., Nagl, M. (eds.) AGTIVE 1999. LNCS, vol. 1779, pp. 31–45. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ehrig, H., Engels, G.: Pragmatic and semantic aspects of a module concept for graph transformation systems. In: Cuny, J., Engels, G., Ehrig, H., Rozenberg, G. (eds.) Graph Grammars 1994. LNCS, vol. 1073, pp. 137–154. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Heckel, R., Ehrig, H., Engels, G., Taentzer, G.: A view-based approach to system modeling based on open graph transformation systems. In: [18], pp. 639–668Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ehrig, H., Engels, G., Kreowski, H.J., Rozenberg, G. (eds.): TAGT 1998. LNCS, vol. 1764. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ehrig, H., Engels, G., Kreowski, H.J., Rozenberg, G. (eds.): Handbook on Graph Grammars and Computing by Graph Transformation: Applications, Languages, and Tools, 1st edn., vol. 2. World Scientific, Singapore (1999)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ulrike Ranger
    • 1
  • Katja Gruber
    • 1
  • Marc Holze
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Computer Science 3 (Software Engineering)RWTH Aachen UniversityAachenGermany
  2. 2.Distributed Systems and Information SystemsUniversity of HamburgHamburgGermany

Personalised recommendations