Domain-specific language modelling with UML profiles by decoupling abstract and concrete syntaxes

UML profiling presents some acknowledged deficiencies, among which the lack of expressiveness of the profiled notations, together with the high coupling between abstract and concrete syntaxes outstand. These deficiencies may cause distress among UML-profile modellers, who are often forced to extend from unsuitable metaclasses for mere notational reasons, or even to model domain-specific languages from scratch just to avoid the UML-profiling limitations. In order to palliate this situation, this article presents an extension of the UML profile metamodel to support arbitrarily-complex notational extensions by decoupling the UML abstract and concrete syntax. Instead of defining yet another metamodel for UML-notational profiling, notational extensions are modelled with DI, i.e., the UML notation metamodel for diagram interchange, keeping in this way the extension within the standard. Profiled UML notations are rendered with DI by defining the graphical properties involved, the domain-specific constraints applied to DI, and the rendering routines associated. Decoupling abstract and concrete syntax in UML profiles increases the notation expressiveness while decreasing the abstract-syntax complexity.

[1]  Ed Seidewitz,et al.  What Models Mean , 2003, IEEE Softw..

[2]  Jim Conallen,et al.  Building Web applications with UML , 1999 .

[3]  Juan Trujillo,et al.  Conceptual Modeling for Classification Mining in Data Warehouses , 2006, DaWaK.

[4]  Jesús Pardillo,et al.  A UML profile for the conceptual modelling of data-mining with time-series in data warehouses , 2009, Inf. Softw. Technol..

[5]  Il-Yeol Song,et al.  Multidimensional Modeling with UML Package Diagrams , 2002, ER.

[6]  Miroslaw Staron,et al.  Empirical assessment of using stereotypes to improve comprehension of UML models: A set of experiments , 2006, J. Syst. Softw..

[7]  Philippe Castagliola,et al.  A Comparison of the Readability of Graphs Using Node-Link and Matrix-Based Representations , 2004 .

[8]  Barbara Liskov,et al.  Keynote address - data abstraction and hierarchy , 1988, OOPSLA '87.

[9]  Barbara Kitchenham,et al.  Procedures for Performing Systematic Reviews , 2004 .

[10]  Thomas Baar Correctly defined concrete syntax , 2008, Software & Systems Modeling.

[11]  Grady Booch,et al.  Object-Oriented Analysis and Design with Applications , 1990 .

[12]  Peter P. Chen The entity-relationship model: toward a unified view of data , 1975, VLDB '75.

[13]  Matteo Golfarelli,et al.  UML-Based Modeling for What-If Analysis , 2008, DaWaK.

[14]  Jeffrey Parsons,et al.  How UML is used , 2006, CACM.

[15]  José Samos,et al.  YAM2: a multidimensional conceptual model extending UML , 2006, Inf. Syst..

[16]  Marian Petre,et al.  Usability Analysis of Visual Programming Environments: A 'Cognitive Dimensions' Framework , 1996, J. Vis. Lang. Comput..

[17]  Jean-Marie Favre,et al.  Towards a Basic Theory to Model Model Driven Engineering , 2004 .

[18]  Panos Vassiliadis,et al.  Data Mapping Diagrams for Data Warehouse Design with UML , 2004, ER.

[19]  Martin Glinz,et al.  A Classification of Stereotypes for Object-Oriented Modeling Languages , 1999, UML.

[20]  Burkhard Freitag,et al.  A UML Profile for Modeling Schema Mappings , 2006, ER.

[21]  Matteo Golfarelli,et al.  Visual Modelling of Data Warehousing Flows with UML Profiles , 2009, DaWaK.

[22]  Grady Booch,et al.  Object-oriented analysis and design with applications, third edition , 2007, SOEN.

[23]  Esperanza Marcos,et al.  Extending UML for Object-Relational Database Design , 2001, UML.

[24]  Klaus Schmid,et al.  Guidelines on the aesthetic quality of UML class diagrams , 2009, Inf. Softw. Technol..

[25]  Jesús Pardillo,et al.  Integrating Clustering Data Mining into the Multidimensional Modeling of Data Warehouses with UML Profiles , 2007, DaWaK.

[26]  Władysław Turski,et al.  The specification of computer programs , 1987 .

[27]  Sergio Luján-Mora,et al.  Extending the UML for Multidimensional Modeling , 2002, UML.

[28]  Veronika Stefanov,et al.  Extending UML 2 Activity Diagrams with Business Intelligence Objects , 2005, DaWaK.

[29]  Brian Henderson-Sellers,et al.  Ontological Evaluation of the UML Using the Bunge–Wand–Weber Model , 2002, Software and Systems Modeling.

[30]  Dianxiang Xu,et al.  Specifying behavioral semantics of UML diagrams through graph transformations , 2009, J. Syst. Softw..

[31]  Mario Piattini,et al.  Extending UML for Designing Secure Data Warehouses , 2004, ER.

[32]  Craig Larman,et al.  Applying UML and Patterns: An Introduction to Object-Oriented Analysis and Design and Iterative Development (3rd Edition) , 1997 .

[33]  Juan Trujillo,et al.  Extending the UML for Designing Association Rule Mining Models for Data Warehouses , 2005, DaWaK.

[34]  Il-Yeol Song,et al.  A UML profile for multidimensional modeling in data warehouses , 2006, Data Knowl. Eng..

[35]  Veronika Stefanov,et al.  A UML Profile for Modeling Data Warehouse Usage , 2007, ER Workshops.

[36]  Veronika Stefanov,et al.  A UML Profile for Representing Business Object States in a Data Warehouse , 2007, DaWaK.

[37]  Ralph Johnson,et al.  design patterns elements of reusable object oriented software , 2019 .