A Service-Oriented UML Profile with Formal Support

  • Roberto Bruni
  • Matthias Hölzl
  • Nora Koch
  • Alberto Lluch Lafuente
  • Philip Mayer
  • Ugo Montanari
  • Andreas Schroeder
  • Martin Wirsing
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5900)


We present a UML Profile for the description of service oriented applications. The profile focuses on style-based design and reconfiguration aspects at the architectural level. Moreover, it has formal support in terms of an approach called Architectural Design Rewriting, which enables formal analysis of the UML specifications. We show how our prototypical implementation can be used to analyse and verify properties of a service oriented application.


Formal Semantic Object Constraint Language Type Graph Object Management Group Graph Grammar 
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.


  1. 1.
    Aguirre, N., Maibaum, T.S.E.: Hierarchical temporal specifications of dynamically reconfigurable component based systems. ENTCS 108, 69–81 (2004)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Baresi, L., Heckel, R., Thöne, S., Varró, D.: Style-based modeling and refinement of service-oriented architectures. SOSYM 5(2), 187–207 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    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
  4. 4.
    Bruni, R., Lluch-Lafuente, A., Montanari, U.: Hierarchical design rewriting with maude. ENTCS 238(3), 45–62 (2009)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bruni, R., Lluch Lafuente, A., Montanari, U., Tuosto, E.: Service Oriented Architectural Design. In: Barthe, G., Fournet, C. (eds.) TGC 2007. LNCS, vol. 4912, pp. 186–203. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bruni, R., Lluch Lafuente, A., Montanari, U., Tuosto, E.: Architectural Design Rewriting as an Architecture Description Language. R2D2 Microsoft Research Meeting (2008)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bruni, R., Lluch Lafuente, A., Montanari, U., Tuosto, E.: Style Based Architectural Reconfigurations. EATCS Bulletin 94, 161–180 (2008)zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bucchiarone, A., Bruni, R., Gnesi, S., Lluch Lafuente, A.: Graph-Based Design and Analysis of Dynamic Software Architectures. In: Degano, P., De Nicola, R., Meseguer, J. (eds.) Concurrency, Graphs and Models. LNCS, vol. 5065, pp. 37–56. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    SCA Consortium, Service Component Architecture Policy Framework, Version 1.0 (2007)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Correia, R., Matos, C., Heckel, R., El-Ramly, M.: Architecture migration driven by code categorization. In: Oquendo, F. (ed.) ECSA 2007. LNCS, vol. 4758, pp. 115–122. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Courcelle, B.: The expression of graph properties and graph transformations in monadic second-order logic. In: Rozenberg, G. (ed.) Handbook of Graph Grammars and Computing by Graph Transformation, pp. 313–400. World Scientific, Singapore (1997)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Foster, H., Mayer, P.: Leveraging integrated tools for model-based analysis of service compositions. In: ICIW 2008. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (2008)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Foster, H., Uchitel, S., Kramer, J., Magee, J.: Leveraging Modes and UML2 for Service Brokering Specifications. In: MDWE 2008. LNCS, vol. 389, pp. 76–90. CEUR (2008)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Habel, A.: Hyperedge Replacement: Grammars and Languages. Springer, Heidelberg (1992)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hirsch, D., Montanari, U.: Shaped hierarchical architectural design. ENTCS 109, 97–109 (2004)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Johnston, S.: UML 2.0 Profile for Software Services (2005)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Koch, N., Mayer, P., Heckel, R., Gönczy, L., Montangero, C.: D1.4a: UML for Service- Oriented Systems. Specification, SENSORIA Project 016004 (2007),
  18. 18.
    Mayer, P., Schroeder, A., Koch, N.: A Model-Driven Approach to Service Orchestration. In: SCC 2008, pp. 1–6. IEEE, Los Alamitos (2008)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Meseguer, J., Rosu, G.: The rewriting logic semantics project. TCS 373(3), 213–237 (2007)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Métayer, D.L.: Describing software architecture styles using graph grammars. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 24(7), 521–533 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Object Management Group (OMG). Service oriented architecture Modeling Language (SoaML), (Last visited: July 2009)
  22. 22.
    Plotkin, G.D.: A structural approach to operational semantics. J. Log. Algebr. Program. 60-61, 17–139 (2004)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Shaw, M., Garlan, D.: Software Architecture: Perspectives on an Emerging Discipline. Prentice-Hall, New Jersey (1996)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Skogan, D., Grønmo, R., Solheim, I.: Web service composition in UML. In: EDOC 2004, pp. 47–57. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2004)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Wirsing, M., Clark, A., Gilmore, S., Hölzl, M., Knapp, A., Koch, N., Schroeder, A.: Semantic-Based Development of Service-Oriented Systems. In: Najm, E., Pradat-Peyre, J.-F., Donzeau-Gouge, V.V. (eds.) FORTE 2006. LNCS, vol. 4229, pp. 24–45. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Roberto Bruni
    • 1
  • Matthias Hölzl
    • 3
  • Nora Koch
    • 2
    • 3
  • Alberto Lluch Lafuente
    • 1
  • Philip Mayer
    • 3
  • Ugo Montanari
    • 1
  • Andreas Schroeder
    • 3
  • Martin Wirsing
    • 2
  1. 1.University of Pisa 
  2. 2.Cirquent GmbH 
  3. 3.Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München 

Personalised recommendations