Reconciling the Needs of Architectural Description with Object-Modelling Notations (2000)
| Venue: | In Proceedings of the 3 rd International Conference on the Unified Modelling Language (Models’00 |
| Citations: | 56 - 8 self |
BibTeX
@INPROCEEDINGS{Garlan00reconcilingthe,
author = {David Garlan and Andrew J. Kompanek},
title = {Reconciling the Needs of Architectural Description with Object-Modelling Notations},
booktitle = {In Proceedings of the 3 rd International Conference on the Unified Modelling Language (Models’00},
year = {2000}
}
Years of Citing Articles
Bookmark
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
OpenURL
Abstract
Abstract. Complex software systems require expressive notations for representing their software architectures. Two competing paths have emerged. One is to use a specialized notation for architecture – or architecture description language (ADL). The other is to adapt a general-purpose modeling notation, such as UML. The latter has a number of benefits, including familiarity to developers, close mapping to implementations, and commercial tool support. However, it remains an open question as to how best to use object-oriented notations for architectural description, and, indeed, whether they are sufficiently expressive, as currently defined. In this paper we take a systematic look at these questions, examining the space of possible mappings from ADLs into object notations. Specifically, we describe (a) the principle strategies for representing architectural structure in UML; (b) the benefits and limitations of each strategy; and (c) aspects of architectural description that are intrinsically difficult to model in UML using the strategies. 1
