Advertisement

Properties of Stereotypes from the Perspective of Their Role in Designs

  • Miroslaw Staron
  • Ludwik Kuzniarz
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3713)

Abstract

Stereotypes in object-oriented software development can be perceived in various ways and they can be used for various purposes. As a consequence of these variations, assessing quality of stereotypes needs to be purpose-specific. In this paper we identify eight types of stereotypes and provide a set of criteria for assessing quality of stereotypes. The criteria for each type are formed by a set of properties that characterizes its stereotypes. The identified types are based on the purpose of each stereotype (its role in designs) and its expressiveness. We identified the types of stereotypes and their properties in an empirical way by investigating stereotypes from UML profiles used in industrial software development. The properties are intended to be used in our further research for developing guidelines for creating and using stereotypes in a more efficient way.

Keywords

Object Management Group Concrete Syntax Language Element Base Model Element Stereotyped Class 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Object Management Group, Unified Modeling Language Specification: Infrastructure Version 2.0, OMG (2004), http://www.omg.org (last accessed 2004-02-20)
  2. 2.
    Object Management Group, Unified Modeling Language Specification V. 1.5, OMG (2003), http://www.omg.org (last accessed 2004-10-01)
  3. 3.
    Kuzniarz, L., Staron, M.: On Practical Usage of Stereotypes in UML-Based Software Development. In: The Proc. of Forum on Design and Specification Languages, Marseille, pp. 262–270 (2002)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Atkinson, C., Kühne, T., Henderson-Sellers, B.: Stereotypical Encounters of the Third Kind. In: Jézéquel, J.-M., Hussmann, H., Cook, S. (eds.) UML 2002. LNCS, vol. 2460, pp. 100–114. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Atkinson, C., Kühne, T., Henderson-Sellers, B.: Systematic Stereotype Usage. Software and Systems Modeling 2, 153–163 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Berner, S., Glinz, M., Joos, S.: A Classification of Stereotypes for Object-Oriented Modeling Languages. In: France, R.B., Rumpe, B. (eds.) UML 1999. LNCS, vol. 1723, pp. 249–264. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Miller, J., Mukerji, J.: MDA Guide, OMG (2003), http://www.omg.org/mda/ (last accessed 2004-01-10)
  8. 8.
    Gogolla, M., Henderson-Sellers, B.: Analysis of UML Stereotypes within the UML Metamodel. In: Jézéquel, J.-M., Hussmann, H., Cook, S. (eds.) UML 2002. LNCS, vol. 2460, pp. 84–99. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Atkinson, C., Kühne, T.: Rearchitecting the UML Infrastructure. ACM Trans. on Modeling and Comp. Simulation 12, 290–321 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Atkinson, C., Kühne, T.: The Role of Metamodeling in MDA. In: The Proc. of Workshop in Software Model Engineering, Dresden, Germany (2002)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Atkinson, C., Kühne, T.: Model-Driven Development: A Metamodeling Foundation. IEEE Software 20, 36–41 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Schleicher, A., Westfechtel, B.: Beyond Stereotyping: Metamodeling Approaches for the UML. In: The Proc. of Hawaii Int. Conf. on Syst. Sciences, Maui, HI, USA, pp. 10–17 (2001)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Henningsson, K., Wohlin, C.: Assuring Fault Classification Agreement - an Empirical Evaluation. In: Proc. Int. Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering, pp. 95–104 (2004)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hertzum, M.: Small-Scale Classification Schemes: A Field Study of Requirements Engineering. Computer Supported Cooperative Work 13, 35–61 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wirfs-Brock, R.: Stereotyping: A Technique for Characterizing Objects and Their Interactions. Object Magazine 3, 50–53 (1993)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wirfs-Brock, R., Wilkerson, B., Wiener, L.: Responsibility-Driven Design: Adding to Your Conceptual Toolkit. In: ROAD, vol. 2, pp. 27–34 (1994)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Firesmith, D.G., Henderson-Sellers, B., Graham, I.: The Open Modeling Language (OML) Reference Manual. Cambridge University Press/Sigs Books, New York (1998)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Object Management Group, UML Specification ver. 1.1, OMG (1997), http://www.omg.org (last accessed 2004-10-11)
  19. 19.
    Cook, S.: The UML Family: Profiles, Prefaces and Packages. In: Evans, A., Kent, S., Selic, B. (eds.) UML 2000. LNCS, vol. 1939, pp. 255–264. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Staron, M., Kuzniarz, L., Wallin, L.: A Case Study on Transformation Focused Industrial MDA Realization. In: The Proc. of 3rd Workshop in Software Model Engineering, Lisbon, Portugal (2004)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Evans, A., Maskeri, G., Sammut, P., Willians, J.S.: Building Families of Languages for Model-Driven System Development. In: The Proc. of 2nd Workshop in Software Model Engineering, San Francisco, CA (2003)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Object Management Group, Software Process Engineering Metamodel Specification 1.0, OMG (2001), http://www.omg.org (last accessed 2004-02-01)
  23. 23.
    Object Management Group, UML Profile for CORBA, OMG (2002), http://www.omg.org (last accessed 2004-10-10)
  24. 24.
    Staron, M., Kuzniarz, L., Wallin, L.: Factors Determining Effective Realization of MDA in Industry. In: The Proc. of 2nd Nordic Workshop on the Unified Modeling Language, Turku, Finland, pp. 79–91 (2004)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Telelogic, Telelogic Tau G2 (2004), http://www.telelogic.com
  26. 26.
    Altman, D.: Practical Statistics for Medical Research. Chapman-Hall, Boca Raton (1991)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kuzniarz, L., Ratajski, J.: Code Generation Based on a Specific Stereotype. In: The Proc. of Information Systems Modeling, Roznov, Chech Republic, pp. 119–128 (2002)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Sturm, T., von Voss, J., Boger, M.: Generating Code from UML with Velocity Templates. In: Jézéquel, J.-M., Hussmann, H., Cook, S. (eds.) UML 2002. LNCS, vol. 2460, pp. 150–161. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Object Management Group, Unified Modeling Language: Testing Profile, OMG (2004), http://www.omg.org (last accessed 2004-02-14)
  30. 30.
    Object Management Group, UML Profile for Schedulability, Performance and Time, OMG (2002), http://www.omg.org (last accessed 2003-09-20)

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Miroslaw Staron
    • 1
  • Ludwik Kuzniarz
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Systems and Software Engineering School of EngineeringBlekinge Institute of TechnologyRonnebySweden

Personalised recommendations