Requirements Definition for Domain-Specific Modelling Languages: The ComVantage Case

  • Robert Andrei Buchmann
  • Dimitris Karagiannis
  • Niksa Visic
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 158)


The goal of this paper is to investigate the challenge of defining and answering modelling language requirements with domain specificity in the instance case of the ComVantage EU research project, which provides a multifaceted domain, with subdomains identified along two dimensions: a) the application dimension, where subdomains are defined by the application areas providing use cases: mobile maintenance, customer-oriented production and production line commissioning; b) the technical dimension, where subdomains are derived from a grouping of the encountered technical problems - supply chain definition in virtual enterprises, business process-driven mobile app and data requirements, business process management considering the execution environment and control of access to its resources/artefacts, design of products and services, or incident escalation management. The paper describes the requirements sources, their definition methodology and an initial derivation of modelling method building blocks from the identified requirements.


modelling requirements metamodelling business process knowledge acquisition 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    The ComVantage Project Public Deliverables,
  2. 2.
    Checkland, P.B., Poulter, J.: Learning for Action: A short definitive account of Soft Systems Methodology and its use for Practitioners, teachers and Students. Wiley (2006)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Karagiannis, D., Kühn, H.: Metamodelling platforms. In: Bauknecht, K., Tjoa, A.M., Quirchmayr, G. (eds.) EC-Web 2002. LNCS, vol. 2455, p. 182. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    OMILab, the ComVantage experimentation space,
  5. 5.
    Karagiannis, D., Visic, N.: Next Generation of Modelling Platforms. In: Grabis, J., Kirikova, M. (eds.) BIR 2011. LNBIP, vol. 90, pp. 19–28. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hrgovic, V., Utz, W., Karagiannis, D.: Service Modelling: A Model Based Approach for Business and IT Alignment. In: The 5th Int. IEEE Workshop on Requirements Engineering for Services (COMPSAC Workshops), pp. 422–427. IEEE Computer Society (2011)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lundqvist, M., Sandkuhl, K., Seigerroth, U.: Enterprise Modelling in Distributed Teams-Lessons Learned from Information Demand Modelling. In: Kirikova, N., Stirna, J. (eds.) Proceedings of the CAISE Forum 2012. CEUR Proceedings, vol. 855, pp. 139-146, (2012)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lundqvist, M., Sandkuhl, K., Seigerroth, U.: Transfer of Method Knowledge and Modelling in Distributed Teams – Lessons Learned. In: Aseeva, N., Babkin, E., Kozyrev, O. (eds.) BIR 2012. LNBIP, vol. 128, pp. 26–40. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Businska, L., Kirikova, M.: Knowledge Dimension in Business Process Modeling. In: Nurcan, S. (ed.) CAiSE Forum 2011. LNBIP, vol. 107, pp. 186–201. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Burge, J.E.: Knowledge Elicitation Tool Classification,
  11. 11.
    The Linked Data Design Issues,
  12. 12.
    SPARQL Query Language, the official web page,
  13. 13.
    ADOxx – the official product page,
  14. 14.
    Website of Volere Requirements Specification Template,
  15. 15.
    Pruitt, K., Adlin, T.: The Persona Lifecycle. Morgan Kaufmann (2006)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Fill, H.-G., Redmond, T., Karagiannis, D.: FDMM: A Formalism for Describing ADOxx Meta Models and Models. In: Maciaszek, L.A., Cuzzocrea, A., Cordeiro, J. (eds.) Proceedings of ICEIS, pp. 133–144. SciTePress (2012)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Márquez, A.C.: The Maintenance Management Framework. Springer (2010)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    The Supply Chain Operations Reference,
  19. 19.
    Liepina, L., Kirikova, M.: SCOR based ISS Requirements Identification. In: Abramowicz, W., Maciaszek, L., Węcel, K. (eds.) BIS 2011 Workshops. LNBIP, vol. 97, pp. 232–243. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Gordijn, J., Akkermans, H.: E3-value: design and evaluation of e-Business models. IEEE Intelligent Systems 16(4), 11–17 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kang, K., Cohen, S., Hess, J., Novak, W., Peterson, A.: Feature-Oriented Domain Analysis (FODA) Feasibility Study,
  22. 22.
    ADONIS – Community Edition, the official website,
  23. 23.
    Calvary, G., Coutaz, J., Thevenin, D., Limbourg, Q., Bouillon, L., Vanderdonckt, J.: A Unifying Reference Framework for Multi-Target User Interfaces. Interacting with Computers 15(3), 289–308 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Software supporting the SCOR framework,
  25. 25.
  26. 26.
    Kano, N., Nobuhiku, S., Fumio, T., Shinichi, T.: Attractive quality and must-be quality. Journal of the Japanese Society for Quality Control 14(2), 39–48 (1984)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    BPMN, the official website,
  28. 28.
    Mylopoulos, J.: Conceptual modeling and Telos1. In: Loucopoulos, P., Zicari, R. (eds.) Conceptual Modeling, Databases, and Case An Integrated View of Information Systems Development, pp. 49–68. Wiley (1992)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Robert Andrei Buchmann
    • 1
  • Dimitris Karagiannis
    • 1
  • Niksa Visic
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of Computer Science, Knowledge Engineering Research GroupUniversity of ViennaViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations