Results 11 - 20
of
24
Where's the Schema? Taxonomy Of Patterns for Software Exchange
- In Proc. of the 10 th International Workshop on Program Comprehension (IWPC
, 2002
"... information about the design and implementation of software systems. Before tools can exchange information, they must share, at some level, the organization for the data exchanged. That is, they must share a schema. In this paper we examine the various ways in which schemas are represented and used ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 15 (0 self)
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
information about the design and implementation of software systems. Before tools can exchange information, they must share, at some level, the organization for the data exchanged. That is, they must share a schema. In this paper we examine the various ways in which schemas are represented and used in tools. Schema use is classified according to how and where a schema is defined, leading to the identification of four patterns of exchange. We examine these exchange patterns and discuss how each has been used in existing tool integration technologies. An evaluation of each exchange pattern against the requirements for a standard exchange format reveal the pattern of schema use that is most suitable for integrating tools.
GraX: Graph Exchange Format
- In Proceedings of the Workshop on Standard Exchange Formats (WoSEF) at ICSE’00
, 2000
"... This paper introduces the GraX graph exchange format that can be used by software engineering tools. The data to be transferred are separated into a schema and an instance part which are both exchanged in the same way. The application of GraX as a vehicle for tool interoperability will be exempli ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 10 (1 self)
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
This paper introduces the GraX graph exchange format that can be used by software engineering tools. The data to be transferred are separated into a schema and an instance part which are both exchanged in the same way. The application of GraX as a vehicle for tool interoperability will be exemplified in the context of CASE and software reengineering tools. Keywords: exchange format, XML, CASE tool interoperability, reengineering tool interoperability, graph technology 1 Motivation To enable interoperability between tools supporting various tasks in software engineering a suitable mechanism for interchanging data between those tools is required. Several data exchange formats have been developed to exchange models of software systems and information systems on various levels of abstraction (for CASE 1 tools see e. g. CDIF [7, 8] and XMI [11] and for CARE 1 tools see e. g. ASFIX [12], RSF [16], and TA [9]). Due to the heterogeneity of the subject domain of different tools ther...
JKogge: a Component-Based Approach for Tools in the Internet
, 1999
"... The huge success of the Internet encourages existing systems to evolve by using this technology. This paper presents a componentbased architecture for a system which is especially designed for tools working in the Internet. ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 5 (4 self)
- Add to MetaCart
The huge success of the Internet encourages existing systems to evolve by using this technology. This paper presents a componentbased architecture for a system which is especially designed for tools working in the Internet.
The Extract-Transform-Rewrite Cycle -- A Step towards MetaCARE
- PROCEEDINGS OF THE 2ND EUROMICRO CONFERENCE ON SOFTWARE MAINTENANCE & REENGINEERING. IEEE COMPUTER SOCIETY, LOS ALAMITOS
, 1997
"... A conceptual reengineering framework is presented that proposes extract, transform and rewrite as three characteristic steps to be performed within a reengineering cycle. The cycle is illustrated by an application example and a prototype tool for the C programming language. This tool supports it ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 5 (2 self)
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
A conceptual reengineering framework is presented that proposes extract, transform and rewrite as three characteristic steps to be performed within a reengineering cycle. The cycle is illustrated by an application example and a prototype tool for the C programming language. This tool supports its user in consistently renaming identifiers, in moving functions and in editing function comments. Then, the generalization of this approach into a metaCARE technology is sketched and ways of implementing a metaCARE tool are given.
A method for describing the syntax and semantics of UML statecharts
- SOFTW SYST MODEL
, 2004
"... In this article we present a method for describing the language of UML statecharts. Statecharts are syntactically defined as attributed graphs, with well-formedness rules syntax of the graphs. The dynamic semantics of statecharts is defined by Abstract State Machines parameterized with syntacticall ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 4 (0 self)
- Add to MetaCart
In this article we present a method for describing the language of UML statecharts. Statecharts are syntactically defined as attributed graphs, with well-formedness rules syntax of the graphs. The dynamic semantics of statecharts is defined by Abstract State Machines parameterized with syntactically-correct attributed graphs. The presented approach covers many important constructs of UML statecharts, including internal, completion, interlevel and compound transitions as well as history pseudostates. It also contains strategies to handle state entry/exit actions, state activities, synch states and choice pseudostates.
Object-Oriented Modelling Languages: State of the Art and Open Research Questions
- IN M. SCHADER & A. KORTHAUS (EDS.), THE UNIFIED MODELING LANGUAGE: TECHNICAL ASPECTS AND APPLICATIONS
, 1998
"... Object-oriented modeling is used in a growing number of commercial software development projects. But the plethora of approaches and corresponding CASE tools still prevents corporate users from migrating to object-oriented software development methods. Against this background the recent efforts of ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 1 (0 self)
- Add to MetaCart
Object-oriented modeling is used in a growing number of commercial software development projects. But the plethora of approaches and corresponding CASE tools still prevents corporate users from migrating to object-oriented software development methods. Against this background the recent efforts of the Object Management Group (OMG) to standardize object-oriented modeling languages seem to promise substantial benefits: Not only will a standard allow to transfer a model from one CASE tool to another, it will also protect investment in training. However, at the same time it is questionable whether the state of the art in object-oriented modeling is mature enough to allow for standardization. In order to answer this question, we will briefly describe the proposals submitted to the OMG in January 1997. We will then show that there are still essential problems in designing modeling languages which have not been addressed yet.
Towards a Standardization of Object-oriented Modelling Languages?
, 2007
"... Object-oriented modelling is used in a growing number of commercial software development projects. However, the plethora of approaches and corresponding CASE tools still prevents corporate users to migrate to object-oriented software development methods. Against this background the recent efforts of ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 1 (0 self)
- Add to MetaCart
Object-oriented modelling is used in a growing number of commercial software development projects. However, the plethora of approaches and corresponding CASE tools still prevents corporate users to migrate to object-oriented software development methods. Against this background the recent efforts of the Object Management Group (OMG) to standardize objectoriented modelling languages seem to promise substantial benefits: Not only will a standard allow to easily port a model from one CASE tool to another, it will also protect investment in training. In addition, it is a prerequisite for standardized business object models which - in the long run - may substantially improve the economics of developing and maintaining corporate information systems. Nevertheless there are objections against a standardization at present time: It is questionable, whether the state of the art in object-oriented modelling is mature enough to allow for standardization. Furthermore standardization holds the risk to discourage further innovations. In order to
The MEMO META-METAMODEL
, 1998
"... "Multi Perspective Enterprise Modelling" (MEMO) is a method to support the development of enterprise models. It suggests a number of abstractions which allow to analyse and design various interrelated aspects like corporate strategy, business processes, organizational structure and informa ..."
Abstract
- Add to MetaCart
"Multi Perspective Enterprise Modelling" (MEMO) is a method to support the development of enterprise models. It suggests a number of abstractions which allow to analyse and design various interrelated aspects like corporate strategy, business processes, organizational structure and information models. Any of those views can be modelled with a specific modelling language or diagram technique respectively. In order to allow for a tight integration of the various perspectives, the modelling languages suggested by MEMO are based on common concepts. Those concepts are defined using a common meta level language. It serves to specify more specialized languages, such as the MEMO Object Modelling Language (MEMO-OML) or the MEMO Organisation Modelling Language (MEMO-OrgML). The meta level language itself is defined within a meta-metamodel. Based on a discussion of the purpose to be fulfilled by a meta-metamodel and a comparison with other meta-metamodels, this report provides a semiformal specif...
Framework for Domain- Specific Modeling
"... Abstract Domain-specific languages (DSLs) provide abstractions and notations for better understanding and easier modeling of applications in a special domain. Current shortcomings of DSLs include learning curve and formal semantics. This paper reports on a framework that allows the use of ontology t ..."
Abstract
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Abstract Domain-specific languages (DSLs) provide abstractions and notations for better understanding and easier modeling of applications in a special domain. Current shortcomings of DSLs include learning curve and formal semantics. This paper reports on a framework that allows the use of ontology technologies to describe and reason on DSLs. The formal semantics of OWL together with reasoning services allows for addressing constraint definition, progressive evaluation, suggestions, and debugging. The approach integrates existing metamodels and concrete syntaxes in a new technical space. A scenario in which domain models for network devices are created illustrates the framework. 1
