A Unified Modelling Language without referential redundancy

The paper argues that, as a language for representing concrete problem domains, the quality of the UML is compromised by its many referentially redundant modelling constructs. A referential redundancy occurs when several modelling constructs or model elements refer to the same classes, things or properties in the problem domain. Referential redundancy compromises language and model quality because it hampers consistency checking, update reflection and reuse of model content between different diagrams or models. To alleviate this problem, the paper shows how the relevant parts of the UML can be reformulated using faceted metamodelling, so that referential redundancy is eliminated at the language level and potentially reduced at the model level. The discussion contrasts faceted metamodelling with conventional metamodelling using metaobjects, -properties and -relationships and argues that many of the referential redundancies in the UML are introduced by the conventional metamodelling approach used to define it.

[1]  Sjaak Brinkkemper,et al.  Complexity Metrics for Systems Development Methods and Techniques , 1996, Inf. Syst..

[2]  Joerg Evermann,et al.  Towards Ontologically Based Semantics for UML Constructs , 2001, ER.

[3]  Brian Henderson-Sellers,et al.  A Template for Defining Enterprise Modeling Constructs , 2004, J. Database Manag..

[4]  Kalle Lyytinen,et al.  MetaEdit+: A Fully Configurable Multi-User and Multi-Tool CASE and CAME Environment , 1996, CAiSE.

[5]  R. Chisholm A Realistic Theory of Categories: An Essay on Ontology , 1998 .

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

[7]  Ron Weber,et al.  Understanding relationships with attributes in entity-relationship diagrams , 1999, ICIS.

[8]  Won Kim,et al.  Object-Oriented Concepts, Databases, and Applications , 1989 .

[9]  Brian Henderson-Sellers,et al.  Ontological analysis of whole-part relationships in OO-models , 2001, Inf. Softw. Technol..

[10]  Andreas L. Opdahl,et al.  Multi-perspective multi-purpose enterprise knowledge modelling , 2003, ISPE CE.

[11]  Yair Wand,et al.  A Proposal for a Formal Model of Objects , 1989, Object-Oriented Concepts, Databases, and Applications.

[12]  Brian Henderson-Sellers,et al.  Grounding the OML metamodel in ontology , 2001, J. Syst. Softw..

[13]  Andreas L. Opdahl,et al.  Facet Modelling: An Approach to Flexible and Integrated Conceptual Modelling , 1997, Inf. Syst..

[14]  Brian Henderson-Sellers,et al.  Template-Based Definition of Information Systems and Enterprise Modelling Constructs , 2005 .

[15]  Yair Wand,et al.  Using objects for systems analysis , 1997, CACM.

[16]  G. Lakoff,et al.  Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind , 1988 .

[17]  Arne Sølvberg,et al.  Understanding quality in conceptual modeling , 1994, IEEE Software.

[18]  Yanchun Zhang,et al.  An analytical evaluation of NIAM'S grammar for conceptual schema diagrams , 1996, Inf. Syst. J..

[19]  S. Pinker The Language Instinct , 1994 .

[20]  Andreas L. Opdahl,et al.  Facet Models for Problem Analysis , 1995, CAiSE.

[21]  G. Lakoff Women, fire, and dangerous things : what categories reveal about the mind , 1989 .

[22]  Brian Henderson-Sellers,et al.  Open Modeling Language (OML)-Refer-ence Manual , 1998 .

[23]  Ron Weber,et al.  Should Optional Properties Be Used in Conceptual Modelling? A Theory and Three Empirical Tests , 2001, Inf. Syst. Res..

[24]  Yair Wand,et al.  Emancipating instances from the tyranny of classes in information modeling , 2000, TODS.

[25]  Ron Weber,et al.  On the deep structure of information systems , 1995, Inf. Syst. J..

[26]  S. Pinker How the Mind Works , 1999, Philosophy after Darwin.

[27]  R. Jackendoff Patterns in the Mind: Language and Human Nature , 1993 .

[28]  George Spanoudakis,et al.  Overlaps in Requirements Engineering , 1999, Automated Software Engineering.

[29]  Brian Henderson-Sellers,et al.  An Ontological Evaluation of the OML Metamodel , 2000, ISCO.

[30]  Ron Weber,et al.  On the ontological expressiveness of information systems analysis and design grammars , 1993, Inf. Syst. J..

[31]  Andy Evans,et al.  Aspect-oriented Metamodelling , 2003, Comput. J..

[32]  Colette Rolland,et al.  Object Oriented Approach in Information Systems , 1991 .

[33]  Graeme G. Shanks,et al.  Improving the Quality of Entity Relationship Models: An Action Research Programme , 1998, Aust. Comput. J..

[34]  John R. Anderson Cognitive Psychology and Its Implications , 1980 .