A semi-automatic approach for bridging DSMLs with UML

Purpose – The definition of modeling languages is a key‐prerequisite for model‐driven engineering. In this respect, Domain‐Specific Modeling Languages (DSMLs) defined from scratch in terms of metamodels and the extension of Unified Modeling Language (UML) by profiles are the proposed options. For interoperability reasons, however, the need arises to bridge modeling languages originally defined as DSMLs to UML. Therefore, the paper aims to propose a semi‐automatic approach for bridging DSMLs and UML by employing model‐driven techniques.Design/methodology/approach – The paper discusses problems of the ad hoc integration of DSMLs and UML and from this discussion a systematic and semi‐automatic integration approach consisting of two phases is derived. In the first phase, the correspondences between the modeling concepts of the DSML and UML are defined manually. In the second phase, these correspondences are used for automatically producing UML profiles to represent the domain‐specific modeling concepts in UML...

[1]  Colin Atkinson,et al.  Profiles in a strict metamodeling framework , 2002, Sci. Comput. Program..

[2]  Erhard Rahm,et al.  A survey of approaches to automatic schema matching , 2001, The VLDB Journal.

[3]  Jean Bézivin,et al.  AMW: a generic model weaver , 2005 .

[4]  Antonio Vallecillo,et al.  WebML modelling in UML , 2007, IET Softw..

[5]  Achim D. Brucker,et al.  Metamodel-based UML Notations for Domain-specific Languages , 2007 .

[6]  Gerti Kappel,et al.  A Framework for Building Mapping Operators Resolving Structural Heterogeneities , 2008, UNISCON.

[7]  Arie van Deursen,et al.  Visualisation of Domain-Specific Modelling Languages Using UML , 2007, 14th Annual IEEE International Conference and Workshops on the Engineering of Computer-Based Systems (ECBS'07).

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

[9]  Gerti Kappel,et al.  On Models and Ontologies - A Semantic Infrastructure Supporting Model Integration , 2006, Modellierung.

[10]  Juha-Pekka Tolvanen,et al.  Domain-Specific Modeling: Enabling Full Code Generation , 2008 .

[11]  Frédéric Jouault,et al.  Transforming Models with ATL , 2005, MoDELS.

[12]  Stefano Ceri,et al.  Web Modeling Language (WebML): a modeling language for designing Web sites , 2000, Comput. Networks.

[13]  Felix Naumann,et al.  A Classification of Schema Mappings and Analysis of Mapping Tools , 2007, BTW.

[14]  Krzysztof Czarnecki,et al.  Feature-based survey of model transformation approaches , 2006, IBM Syst. J..

[15]  Bernhard Rumpe,et al.  Model-driven Development of Complex Software : A Research Roadmap , 2007 .

[16]  Andy Schürr,et al.  A Comparison of Standard Compliant Ways to Define Domain Specific Languages , 2008, MoDELS.

[17]  J. Bézivin,et al.  A Practical Approach to Bridging Domain Specific Languages with UML profiles , 2005 .

[18]  Vipul Kashyap,et al.  Semantic and schematic similarities between database objects: a context-based approach , 1996, The VLDB Journal.

[19]  Perdita Stevens,et al.  Bidirectional model transformations in QVT: semantic issues and open questions , 2007, MODELS'07.

[20]  Philip A. Bernstein,et al.  Model management 2.0: manipulating richer mappings , 2007, SIGMOD '07.

[21]  Jean Bézivin,et al.  TCS:: a DSL for the specification of textual concrete syntaxes in model engineering , 2006, GPCE '06.

[22]  Colin Atkinson,et al.  The Essence of Multilevel Metamodeling , 2001, UML.