A Diagrammatic Formalisation of MOF-Based Modelling Languages

  • Adrian Rutle
  • Alessandro Rossini
  • Yngve Lamo
  • Uwe Wolter
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 33)


In Model-Driven Engineering (MDE) models are the primary artefacts of the software development process. The usage of these models have resulted in the introduction of a variety of modelling languages and frameworks. Many of these languages and frameworks are based on the Object Management Group’s (OMG) Meta-Object Facility (MOF). In addition to their diagrammatic syntax, these languages use the Object Constraint Language to specify constraints that are difficult to specify diagrammatically. In this paper, we argue for a completely diagrammatic specification framework for MDE, where by diagrammatic we mean specification techniques which are targeting graph-based structures. We introduce the Diagram Predicate Framework, which provides a formal diagrammatic approach to modelling based on category theory – the mathematics of graph-based structures. The development of a generic and flexible formalisation of metamodelling is the main contribution of the paper. We illustrate our approach through the formalisation of the kernel of the Eclipse Modeling Framework.


Model-Driven Engineering Meta-Object Facility Unified Modeling Language Object Constraint Language Eclipse Modeling Framework Diagram Predicate Framework diagrammatic specification 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Object Management Group: Unified Modeling Language Specification (November 2007),
  2. 2.
    Eclipse Modeling Framework,
  3. 3.
    Object Management Group: Meta-Object Facility Specification (January 2006),
  4. 4.
    Diskin, Z.: Mathematics of UML: Making the Odysseys of UML less dramatic. In: Practical foundations of business system specifications, pp. 145–178. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Poernomo, I.: A Type Theoretic Framework for Formal Metamodelling. In: Reussner, R., Stafford, J.A., Szyperski, C. (eds.) Architecting Systems with Trustworthy Components. LNCS, vol. 3938, pp. 262–298. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Boronat, A., Meseguer, J.: An Algebraic Semantics for MOF. In: Fiadeiro, J.L., Inverardi, P. (eds.) FASE 2008. LNCS, vol. 4961, pp. 377–391. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Diskin, Z., Wolter, U.: A Diagrammatic Logic for Object-Oriented Visual Modeling. In: ACCAT 2007: 2nd Workshop on Applied and Computational Category Theory. ENTCS, vol. 203, pp. 19–41. Elsevier Science Publishers B.V., Amsterdam (2008)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rutle, A., Wolter, U., Lamo, Y.: A Diagrammatic Approach to Model Transformations. In: EATIS 2008: Euro American Conference on Telematics and Information Systems (to appear)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rutle, A., Wolter, U., Lamo, Y.: A Formal Approach to Modeling and Model Transformations in Software Engineering. Technical Report 48, Turku Centre for Computer Science, Finland (2008)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rutle, A., Rossini, A., Lamo, Y., Wolter, U.: A Category-Theoretical Approach to the Formalisation of Version Control in MDE. In: Chechik, M., Wirsing, M. (eds.) FASE 2009. LNCS, vol. 5503, pp. 64–78. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ehrig, H., Ehrig, K., Prange, U., Taentzer, G.: Fundamentals of Algebraic Graph Transformation. Springer, Heidelberg (March 2006)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Object Management Group: Object Constraint Language Specification (May 2006),
  13. 13.
    Warmer, J., Kleppe, A.: The Object Constraint Language: Getting your models ready for MDA, 2nd edn. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2003)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Marković, S., Baar, T.: Refactoring OCL annotated UML class diagrams. Software and System Modeling 7(1), 25–47 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Taentzer, G., Rensink, A.: Ensuring Structural Constraints in Graph-Based Models with Type Inheritance. In: Cerioli, M. (ed.) FASE 2005. LNCS, vol. 3442, pp. 64–79. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Barr, M., Wells, C.: Category Theory for Computing Science, 2nd edn. Prentice Hall International Ltd., Hertfordshire (1995)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Fiadeiro, J.L.: Categories for Software Engineering. Springer, Heidelberg (May 2004)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Makkai, M.: Generalized Sketches as a Framework for Completeness Theorems. Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra 115, 49–79, 179–212, 214–274 (1997)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Diskin, Z., Kadish, B.: Generic Model Management. In: Encyclopedia of Database Technologies and Applications, pp. 258–265. Idea Group (2005)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Diskin, Z., Dingel, J.: Mappings, Maps and Tables: Towards Formal Semantics for Associations in UML2. In: Nierstrasz, O., Whittle, J., Harel, D., Reggio, G. (eds.) MoDELS 2006. LNCS, vol. 4199, pp. 230–244. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bottoni, P., Koch, M., Parisi-Presicce, F., Taentzer, G.: A Visualization of OCL Using Collaborations. In: Gogolla, M., Kobryn, C. (eds.) UML 2001. LNCS, vol. 2185, pp. 257–271. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Cicchetti, A., Di Ruscio, D., Pierantonio, A.: A Metamodel Independent Approach to Difference Representation. Journal of Object Technology (Special Issue on TOOLS Europe 2007) 6(9), 165–185 (2007)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Budinsky, F., Merks, E., Steinberg, D.: EMF: Eclipse Modeling Framework 2.0, 2nd edn. Addison-Wesley Professional, Reading (2006)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Romero, J.R., Rivera, J.E., Durán, F., Vallecillo, A.: Formal and Tool Support for Model Driven Engineering with Maude. Journal of Object Technology 6(9), 187–207 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
  26. 26.
    Visual OCL: Project Web Site,
  27. 27.
    Alloy: Project Web Site,
  28. 28.
    Diskin, Z., Easterbrook, S.M., Dingel, J.: Engineering Associations: From Models to Code and Back through Semantics. In: Paige, R.F., Meyer, B. (eds.) TOOLS Europe 2008. LNBIP, vol. 11, pp. 336–355. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Adrian Rutle
    • 1
  • Alessandro Rossini
    • 2
  • Yngve Lamo
    • 1
  • Uwe Wolter
    • 2
  1. 1.Bergen University CollegeBergenNorway
  2. 2.University of BergenBergenNorway

Personalised recommendations