Advertisement

Formalizing MDA Components

  • Liliana Favre
  • Liliana Martinez
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4039)

Abstract

The Model Driven Architecture (MDA) promotes the use of models and model transformations for developing software systems. The idea behind MDA is to manage the evolution from Platform Independent Models to Platform Specific Models that can be used to generate executable components and applications. The concepts of metamodels and metamodel-based model transformations are critical in MDA. In this paper, we propose a metamodeling technique to reach a high level of reusability and adaptability of MDA components. In particular, we analyze how to define reusable components for the standard design patterns in a way that fits MDA very closely. To define families of reusable components we describe a “megamodel” that refers to metamodels and model transformations organized into an architectural framework. We propose a “megamodel” formalization that focuses on interoperability of formal languages in Model Driven Development (MDD).

Keywords

Model Transformation Design Pattern Object Management Group Reusable Component Model Drive Development 
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.
    Albin-Amiot, H., Guéhéneuc, Y.: Meta-modeling Design Patterns: application to pattern detection and code synthesis. In: Tekinerdogan, B. (ed.) Proceeding of ECOOP Workshop on Automating Object-Oriented Software Development Methods (2001)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Arnout, K.: From Patterns to Components. Ph.D. Thesis, Swiss Institute of Technology (ETH Zurich) (2004)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bettin, J.: Practicalities of Implementing Component-Based Development and Model-Driven Architecture. In: Proceedings of Workshop Process Engineering for Object-Oriented and Component-Based Development, OOSPLA 2003, USA (2003)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bidoit, M., Mosses, P.D.: CASL User Manual- Introduction to Using the Common Algebraic Specification Language. LNCS, vol. 2900. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
  6. 6.
    Czarnecki, K., Helsen, S.: Classification of Model Transformation Approaches. In: Bettin, J., et al. (eds.) Proceedings of OOSPLA 2003 Workshop on Generative Techniques in the Context of Model-Driven Architecture (2003), http://www.oopsla.acm.org/oopsla2003
  7. 7.
    D´Souza, D., Cameron Wills, A.: On Components, and Framework with UML. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1999)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Favre, L.: Foundations for MDA-based Forward Engineering. Journal of Object Technology (JOT) 4(1), 129–153 (2005)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Favre, L.: A Rigorous Framework for Model Driven Development. In: Halpin, T., Krogstie, J., Siau, K. (eds.) Proceedings of CAISE 2005 Workshops. EMMSAD 2005 Tenth International Workshop on Exploring Modeling Method in System Analysis and Design, Porto, Portugal. FEUP Editions, pp. 505–516 (2005)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    France, R., Kim, D., Ghosh, S., Song, E.: A UML-Based Pattern Specification Technique. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 30(3), 193–206 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gamma, E., Helm, R., Johnson, R., Vlissides, J.: Design Patterns. Elements of Reusable Object-Oriented Software. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1995)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Judson, S., Carver, D., France, R.: A metamodeling approach to model transformation. In: OOPSLA Companion 2003, 326–327 (2003)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kuster, J., Sendall, S., Wahler, M.: Comparing Two Model Transformation Approaches. In: Bezivin, J., et al. (eds.) Proceedings of OCL and Model Driven Engineering Workshop, Lisboa, Portugal (2004), http://www.cs.kent.ac.uk/projects/ocl/oclmdewsuml04
  14. 14.
    MDA: The Model Driven Architecture (2005), http://www.omg.org/mda
  15. 15.
    Meyer, B.: The Grand Challenge of Trusted Components. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Software Engineering, Portland, Oregon, pp. 660–667 (2003)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    MOF: Meta Object facility (MOF TM) 1.4, formal/2002-04-03 (2005), www.omg.org/mof
  17. 17.
    OCL: OCL Specification. Version 2.0. Formal document: ptc/03-10-14 (2005), www.omg.org
  18. 18.
    QVT: Revised submission for MOF 2.0 Query/Views/Transformations RFP. Version 1.1. OMG Adopted Specification. ptc/05-11-01 (2003), www.omg.org
  19. 19.
    Szyperski, C., Gruntz, D., Murer, S.: Component Software. Beyond Object-Oriented Programming, 2nd edn. Addison-Wesley and ACM Press (2002)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    UML: UML 2.0 Superstructure Specification. OMG formal/05-07-04 (2005), www.omg.org

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Liliana Favre
    • 1
  • Liliana Martinez
    • 1
  1. 1.Comisión de Investigaciones Científicas de la Provincia de Buenos Aires (CIC)Universidad Nacional del Centro de la Provincia de Buenos AiresArgentina

Personalised recommendations