Modeling Components and Component-Based Systems in KobrA

Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5153)


In this chapter we present a version of the Trading System case study modeled according to the KobrA approach. KobrA is a UML-based method for describing components and component-based systems developed at the Fraunhofer Institute for Experimental Software Engineering at the beginning of the decade. The acronym stands for the term “Komponenten basierte Anwendungsentwicklung” – German for “Component-based Application Development”. KobrA has been successfully used by a number of companies in industrial settings and has given rise to numerous specializations and offshoots (e.g. MARMOT [1] and MORABIT [2]). The original version of the method [3] was developed for the UML 1.x flavor of the UML, but in this chapter we introduce an updated version optimized for use with the 2.x versions of the UML [4] and its related standards such as OCL [5]. KobrA also provides support for other advanced software engineering approaches such as product-lines, but these are beyond the scope of this chapter. Here we focus on the component-modeling aspects of the method.


Software Product Line Context Realization Card Payment Structural View Business Process Modeling Notation 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Fraunhofer Institute for Experimental Software Engineering: The MARMOT Project - Component-based Development of Embedded Systems (2003),
  2. 2.
    Brenner, D., Atkinson, C., Paech, B., Malaka, R., Merdes, M., Suliman, D.: Reducing Verification Effort in Component-Based Software Engineering through Built-In Testing. In: Proceedings of the International IEEE Enterprise Computing Conference (EDOC 2006), 16th-20th October, Hong Kong (2006)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Atkinson, C., Bayer, J., Bunse, C., Kamsties, E., Laitenberger, O., Laqua, R., Muthig, D., Paech, B., Wüst, J., Zettel, J.: Component-Based Product Line Engineering with UML, 1st edn. Addison Wesley, Reading (2001)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    OMG: UML 2.0 Superstructure Specification (2003),
  5. 5.
    Warmer, J., Kleppe, A.: The Object Constraint Language: Precise Modeling with UML. Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Boston (1998)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    OMG: MDA Guide Version 1.0.1 (2003),
  7. 7.
    Ambler, S.W.: Agile Modeling (2006),
  8. 8.
    Clements, P., Northrop, L.: Software Product Lines. Addison-Wesley, Boston (2002)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bayer, J., Flege, O., Knauber, P., Laqua, R., Muthig, D., Schmid, K., Widen, T., Debaud, J.M.: PuLSE. A Methodology to Develop Software Product Lines. In: Proceedings of the Symposium on Software Reuse (SSR 1999) (1999)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Larman, C.: Applying UML and Patterns: An Introduction to Object-Oriented Analysis and Design, 3rd edn. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (2005)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Coad, P., Mayfield, M.: Coad, Yourdon, and Nicola: OOA, OOD, & OOP. Wiley-QED Publishing, Somerset (1994)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    OMG: Business Process Modeling Notation Specification - version 1.0. Final Adopted BPMN 1-0 Spec 06-02-01.pdf (2006),
  13. 13.
    Scheer, A.W.: ARIS - Modellierungsmethoden, Metamodelle, Anwendungen. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Coleman, D., Arnold, P., Bodoff, S., Dollin, C., Gilchrist, H., Hayes, F., Jeremaes, P.: Object-Oriented Development. The Fusion Method. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1994)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    OMG: UML Profile for Schedulability, Performance and Time (2005),
  16. 16.
    OMG: UML Profile for Modeling QoS and Fault Tolerance Characteristics and Mechanisms (2006),

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of MannheimGermany

Personalised recommendations