DOCSLIB.ORG

Research Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Research Report RZ 3621 (# 99631) 07/18/2005 Computer Science 10 pages Research Report A Systematic Approach to Designing Model Transformations Jochen M. Kuster,¨ Ksenia Ryndina and Rainer Hauser IBM Research GmbH Zurich Research Laboratory 8803 Ruschlikon¨ Switzerland {jku,ryn,rfh}@zurich.ibm.com LIMITED DISTRIBUTION NOTICE This report will be distributed outside of IBM up to one year after the IBM publication date. Some reports are available at http://domino.watson.ibm.com/library/Cyberdig.nsf/home. Research IBM Almaden · Austin · Beijing · Delhi · Haifa · T.J. Watson · Tokyo · Zurich A Systematic Approach to Designing Model Transformations Jochen M. Kuster¨ , Ksenia Ryndina and Rainer Hauser IBM Zurich Research Laboratory 8803 R¨uschlikon Switzerland jku,ryn,rfh ¡ @zurich.ibm.com Abstract forming them into a formal language [9]. Currently, a great deal of research is focused on the expression of model transformation Design and implementation of model transformations is one designs and appropriate tool support for model transformation de- key prerequisite for the vision of model driven development to be- velopers. This has led to the Query/Views/Transformation (QVT) come true. However, model transformations are quite different proposal by the Object Management Group (OMG) [21], which from other software artifacts since a model transformation design aims to provide a standardized framework for model transforma- typically consists of a set of transformation rules instead of object- tion development. oriented models such as class diagrams and statecharts. There- fore traditional software engineering approaches are not directly Many existing model transformation approaches favor that applicable for the development of model transformations. Never- transformations are captured in a rule-based way by a set of trans- theless, in the line of existing software engineering practice, model formation rules (see VIATRA [5], GReAT [13], UMLX [26], transformations must be developed in a systematic way in order to BOTL [4] and work by Milicev [17]). Although the actual form ensure their quality. In this paper, we present a systematic method of rules and rule application varies, the general idea is that a rule for designing model transformations, based on a case study ex- consisting of a left side and right side describes how a model is perience. In our approach, the developer initially produces high- supposed to be transformed. The left side is to be matched in the level transformation rules and then refines these to a complete low- source model and then this part is replaced by the right side of the level transformation design according to detailed guidelines. Fol- rule. Defining rules and in which order they should be applied can lowing our method allows systematic and iterative development of be considered as designing a model transformations. model transformations, resulting in quality implementations. In practice, software developers need more than a notation and tool support for capturing model transformation designs. A systematic process guiding the developer from the initial phases 1. Introduction of model transformation development all the way through to im- plementation is required. Traditional software engineering ap- The objective of the Model Driven Architecture (MDA) initia- proaches are not directly applicable, because model transforma- tive [1] is to make development of large and complex software sys- tions differ significantly from other software artifacts. While con- tems more efficient. This objective is achieved through increased ventional software designs usually comprises class and behavioral use of modelling during all software development activities. One diagrams, a model transformation design typically consists of a set important aspect of MDA is the widespread use of model transfor- of transformation rules. The primary challenge for the developer is mations between models constructed during system development. concerned with how to systematically design transformation rules, ensuring their completeness and correctness. Completeness en- Existing examples of model transformations include refactor- sures that all valid input models are considered by the transforma- ing [23, 25], transforming business process models into Business tion. Correctness includes syntactic correctness of the transformed Process Execution Language (BPEL) [10] and establishing con- models and also the preservation of semantic properties during a sistency of Unified Modeling Language (UML) models by trans- transformation. Further, systematic testing of the final transfor- mation implementation is also required. However, despite the de- mand for software engineering approaches tailored to the develop- ment of model transformations, almost no research work has been reported in this area. In this paper, we present a solution to the systematic design of model transformations. We distinguish between high-level, low-level design and design validation of model transformations. Within high-level design, the main ingredients of the transforma- 1 tion rules are captured informally and different cases for each rule the other parts of the business process. After receipt of this signal are discovered. These cases are divided into supported and unsup- at the accept event node, the token flow is passed to the action ¥ ported cases. In low-level design, the supported cases are grouped node ¥ . Action has the special feature that it has a streaming to low-level design rules which are subsequently expressed in a output pin, i.e. tokens are released already while it is executing. model transformation language. Design validation focuses on val- The business process terminates once a token reaches the global idation of syntactic and semantic correctness of the model trans- termination node. formation developed. The evaluation of our approach has been done using a significant model transformation that removes un- If business processes are to be deployed, their design models structured cycles from business process models as a case study. have to be transformed into an executable specification in a nota- tion such as BPEL [18]. Edges in activity diagrams can be used to The paper is organized as follows. First, we briefly describe the create so-called unstructured cycles or arbitrary jumps of control case study that we use for illustrating our technique. Then, we pro- flow, such as in the example. However, BPEL only supports struc- vide an overview of the development process for model transfor- tured flow constructs such as while-loops. As a solution to this mations. Thereafter we elaborate both on high-level and low-level problem, a model transformation removing all unstructured cycles design of model transformations. from activity diagrams needs to be performed before a BPEL spec- ification can be generated. For the basis of this transformation, a traditional compiler theory technique of T1-T2 analysis can be 2. Case Study: Transforming Business Pro- adapted to such normalization of activity diagrams [14]. cess Models Originally, T1-T2 analysis was introduced in order to detect Business processes are usually represented with graphical whether a directed graph is reducible [11]. It is based on two re- models using notations such as UML 2.0 activity diagrams [20]. duction rules [2]: Figure 1 shows a simple example of a business process. The busi- ness process shows simple action nodes ¢¤£¦¥ , a structured activ- 57685 T1: If 5 is a node with a loop, i.e. there exists an edge , ¨ © ity node (SAN) § containing actions and . Further, the pro- cess contains the usual start and end nodes, fork, join and decision delete that edge. nodes. Nodes within a business process are connected by edges via pins, which are organized into pin sets (also known as parameter T2: If there is a node 5 that is not the initial node and that has a 9 5 sets). This business process also makes use of advanced features unique predecessor 9 , then may consume by deleting 5 9 of UML activity diagrams such as a broadcasting, shown with the 5 and making all successors of (including , possibly) be broadcasting node sending a Cycle ended signal and the corre- successors of 9 . sponding accept event node labelled with Receive Cycle ended. These rules can be applied in any order until the so-called “limit # $ % & ' ( ) ! + , - . * flow graph” has been reached and none of the rules are applicable / 0 1 2 3 anymore. If the limit graph consists of a single node, the original graph is reducible, and otherwise the graph is irreducible. " The task of developing the required cycle-removal transforma- tion is to make the T1-T2 analysis applicable to activity diagrams. This means that the rules have to be adapted to preserve the be- havior captured in the activity diagram and must be described in terms of the syntax of activity diagrams, defined by the metamodel Figure 1. Example of a business process shown in Figure 2. Note that this figure shows a UML activity dia- The semantics of activity diagrams is based on token flow, the grams metamodel that was abridged and adapted for our purposes. basic idea of which is that an action receives tokens on its input The most essential elements of activity diagrams are ActivityN- pins and it starts to execute once all the pins in a pin set have odes and ActivityEdges that connect the nodes. We distinguish tokens available. During the execution of an action, the tokens between three different types of ActivityNodes, ControlNodes, from the complete input pin set are removed, an instance of the Actions and Pins. Actions are either simple such as CallAction action is created and executed, after which the results are placed or structured actions called SANs. A BroadcastAction and an on the pins of one of the output pin sets. Tokens are then released AcceptAction can be used to broadcast and receive signals, re- to the edges connected to that output pin set and the flow continues spectively. Pins are connection points for ActivityEdges and are through the rest of the process in this manner. In the example grouped into PinSets (instead of ParameterSets as in the origi- shown in Figure 1, the business process begins execution at the nal metamodel).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Model Transformation Language of the VIATRA2 Framework
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Elsevier - Publisher Connector Science of Computer Programming 68 (2007) 214–234 www.elsevier.com/locate/scico The model transformation language of the VIATRA2 framework Daniel´ Varro´ ∗, Andras´ Balogh Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Department of Measurement and Information Systems, H-1117, Magyar tudosok krt. 2., Budapest, Hungary OptXware Research and Development LLC, Budapest, Hungary Received 15 August 2006; received in revised form 17 April 2007; accepted 14 May 2007 Available online 5 July 2007 Abstract We present the model transformation language of the VIATRA2 framework, which provides a rule- and pattern-based transformation language for manipulating graph models by combining graph transformation and abstract state machines into a single specification paradigm. This language offers advanced constructs for querying (e.g. recursive graph patterns) and manipulating models (e.g. generic transformation and meta-transformation rules) in unidirectional model transformations frequently used in formal model analysis to carry out powerful abstractions. c 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Keywords: Model transformation; Graph transformation; Abstract state machines 1. Introduction The crucial role of model transformation (MT) languages and tools for the overall success of model-driven system development has been revealed in many surveys and papers during the recent years. To provide a standardized support for capturing queries, views and transformations between modeling languages defined by their standard MOF metamodels, the Object Management Group (OMG) has recently issued the QVT standard. QVT provides an intuitive, pattern-based, bidirectional model transformation language, which is especially useful for synchronization kind of transformations between semantically equivalent modeling languages.
    [Show full text]
  • Lessons Learned from Building Model-Driven Development Tools
    Noname manuscript No. (will be inserted by the editor) Lessons Learned from Building Model-Driven Development Tools Richard F. Paige1 and D´anielVarr´o2 Department of Computer Science, University of York, UK. e-mail: [email protected] Department of Measurement and Information Systems Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Hungary. e-mail: [email protected] The date of receipt and acceptance will be inserted by the editor Abstract Tools to support modelling in system and of MDD tools. The principles will be distilled from an software engineering are widespread, and have reached analysis of the development of two MDD tools that are a degree of maturity where their use and availability used in practice: VIATRA and Epsilon. These tools are are accepted. Tools to support Model-Driven Develop- used in industry, on real projects, and have developed ment (MDD) { where models are manipulated and man- in very different ways. Arguably, some of the lessons aged throughout the system/software engineering lifecy- learned from the development of these tools can inform cle { have, over the last ten years, seen much research the development of new MDD tools, and can also be and development attention. Over the last ten years, we used to support the evolution of existing tools. Our ob- have had significant experience in the design, develop- jective is not to propose the \ideal" MDD tool; such a ment and deployment of MDD tools in practical settings. tool is unlikely to exist. However, the principles under- In this paper, we distill some of the important lessons pinning the development of MDD tools that are widely we have learned in developing and deploying two MDD used in practice can help in assessing existing tools, and tools: Epsilon and VIATRA.
    [Show full text]
  • Model-Driven Engineering, the System Under Development Is Described and Analyzed Using Models
    X perf =1.00 X loss =0.01 SDSoftware Design and Quality A Declarative Language for Bidirectional Model Consistency Master’s Thesis of Dominik Werle at the Department of Informatics Institute for Program Structures and Data Organization (IPD) Reviewer: Prof. Dr. Ralf H. Reussner Second reviewer: Jun.-Prof. Dr.-Ing. Anne Koziolek Advisor: Dipl.-Inform. Max E. Kramer Second advisor: M.Sc. Michael Langhammer 09. October 2015 – 08. April 2016 Karlsruher Institut für Technologie Fakultät für Informatik Postfach 6980 76128 Karlsruhe I declare that I have developed and written the enclosed thesis completely by myself, and have not used sources or means without declaration in the text. Karlsruhe, 08. April 2016 .................................... (Dominik Werle) Abstract In model-driven engineering, the system under development is described and analyzed using models. Dierent models provide dierent abstractions of the system for dierent purposes. If multiple modeling languages are used, their models can contain overlapping informa- tion about the system. Then, they can become inconsistent after changes and need to be synchronized. The complexity of synchronizing models can be reduced by specifying consistency relationships in specialized languages and by automating the synchronization based on this specication. The languages can hide complexity that is not specic to the domain of the modeling languages, for example by deriving the operations needed for propagating changes from a model to another model for all pairs of models instead of requiring explicit specication for each pair and direction. In the course of this thesis, we designed the mapping language for specifying these consistency relationships and implemented a framework that maintains consistency based on the specication.
    [Show full text]
  • Expressive and Efficient Model Transformation with an Internal DSL
    Expressive and Efficient Model Transformation with an Internal DSL of Xtend Artur Boronat Department of Informatics, University of Leicester, UK [email protected] ABSTRACT 1 INTRODUCTION Model transformation (MT) of very large models (VLMs), with mil- Over the past decade the application of MDE technology in indus- lions of elements, is a challenging cornerstone for applying Model- try has led to the emergence of very large models (VLMs), with Driven Engineering (MDE) technology in industry. Recent research millions of elements, that may need to be updated using model efforts that tackle this problem have been directed at distributing transformation (MT). This situation is characterized by important MT on the Cloud, either directly, by managing clusters explicitly, or challenges [26], starting from model persistence using XMI serial- indirectly, via external NoSQL data stores. In this paper, we draw at- ization with the Eclipse Modeling Framework (EMF) [31] to scalable tention back to improving efficiency of model transformations that approaches to apply model updates. use EMF natively and that run on non-distributed environments, An important research effort to tackle these challenges was showing that substantial performance gains can still be reaped on performed in the European project MONDO [19] by scaling out that ground. efficient model query and MT engines, such as VIATRA[3] and We present Yet Another Model Transformation Language (YAMTL), ATL/EMFTVM [46], building on Cloud technology either directly, a new internal domain-specific language (DSL) of Xtend for defin- by using distributed clusters of servers explicitly, or indirectly, by ing declarative MT, and its execution engine.
    [Show full text]
  • Formal Validation and Model Generationfor Domain-Specific
    Budapest University of Technology and Economics Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Informatics Department of Measurement and Information Systems Formal Validation and Model Generation for Domain-Specific Languages by Logic Solvers Thesis booklet Oszkár Semeráth Thesis supervisor: Prof. Dániel Varró Budapest, 2019 1. Introduction 1 Introduction 1.1 Domain-specific modeling languages My thesis is motivated by the challenges in the development of complex, safety- critical systems such as automotive, avionics or cyber-physical systems, which is characterized by a long development time and strict safety standards (like DO-178C or DO-330). Model-Based System Engineering (MBSE) is a widely used technique in those application domains [WHR14], which facilitates the use of models in different phases of design and on various levels of abstraction. Fur- thermore, MBSE promotes the use of Domain-Specific (Modeling) Languages (DSLs) to precisely capture the main features of a target domain, thus en- abling the engineers to model their solutions with the concepts of the problem domain. Additionally, advanced modeling environments can automate several development steps, with a particular emphasis on verification and validation (V&V). Thus they can significantly improve the overall productivity of the de- velopment and quality of the product. A complex industrial modeling environment supports the development of models by continuously evaluating consistency constraints to ensure that the models satisfy the design rules of the domain. There is already efficient sup- port for automatically validating constraints and design rules over large model instances of the DSL using tools like Eclipse OCL [Wil12; KPP09] or Viatra [Ber+11; Ber+10]. Modeling environments often incorporate the automated generation of various artifacts such as source code, task specific views, or doc- umentation by using code generation or model transformation techniques.
    [Show full text]
  • Efficient ATL Incremental Transformations
    Journal of Object Technology Published by AITO | Association Internationale pour les Technologies Objets http://www.jot.fm/ Efficient ATL Incremental Transformations Th´eoLe Calvara Fr´ed´ericJouaultb Fabien Chhelb Mickael Clavreulb a. LERIA, University of Angers, France b. ERIS Team, Groupe ESEO, France Abstract Incrementally executing model transformations offers several benefits such as updating target models in-place (instead of creating a new copy), as well as generally propagating changes faster (compared with complete re-execution). Active operations have been shown to of- fer performant OCL-based model transformation incrementality with use- ful properties like fine-grained change propagation, and the preservation of collection ordering. However, active operations have so far only been available as a Java library. This compels users to program at a relatively low level of abstraction, where most technical details are still present. Writing transformations at this level of abstraction is a tedious and error prone work. Using languages like Xtend alleviates some but not all issues. In order to provide active operation users with a more user-friendly front-end, we have worked on compiling ATL code to Java code using the active operations library. Our compiler can handle a significant subset of ATL, and we show that the code it generates provides similar performance to hand-written Java or Xtend code. Furthermore, this compiler also enables new possibilities like defining derived properties by leveraging the ATL refining mode. Keywords Incremental model transformation Active operations ATL. 1 Introduction Incremental model transformation execution offers many advantages over batch (i.e., non-incremental) execution, such as faster change propagation.
    [Show full text]
  • The Train Benchmark: Cross-Technology Performance Evaluation of Continuous Model Queries
    Softw Syst Model DOI 10.1007/s10270-016-0571-8 REGULAR PAPER The Train Benchmark: cross-technology performance evaluation of continuous model queries Gábor Szárnyas1,2,3 · Benedek Izsó1 · István Ráth1,4 · Dániel Varró1,2,3 Received: 30 October 2015 / Revised: 27 March 2016 / Accepted: 3 October 2016 © The Author(s) 2017. This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com Abstract In model-driven development of safety-critical tion rules is challenging for the currently available tools. systems (like automotive, avionics or railways), well- Checking well-formedness constraints can be captured by formedness of models is repeatedly validated in order to declarative queries over graph models, while model update detect design flaws as early as possible. In many indus- operations can be specified as model transformations. This trial tools, validation rules are still often implemented by paper presents a benchmark for systematically assessing the a large amount of imperative model traversal code which scalability of validating and revalidating well-formedness makes those rule implementations complicated and hard constraints over large graph models. The benchmark defines to maintain. Additionally, as models are rapidly increas- well-formedness validation scenarios in the railway domain: ing in size and complexity, efficient execution of valida- a metamodel, an instance model generator and a set of well- formedness constraints captured by queries, fault injection Communicated by Prof. Lionel Briand. and repair operations (imitating the work of systems engi- neers by model transformations). The benchmark focuses This work was partially supported by the MONDO (EU ICT-611125) project, the MTA-BME Lendület Research Group on Cyber-Physical on the performance of query evaluation, i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • Model Transformation by Graph Transformation: a Comparative Study
    Model Transformation by Graph Transformation: A Comparative Study Gabriele Taentzer1, Karsten Ehrig1, Esther Guerra2, Juan de Lara3, Laszlo Lengyel4, Tihamer Levendovszky4, Ulrike Prange1, Daniel Varro4, and Szilvia Varro-Gyapay4 1 Technische Universit¨atBerlin, Germany {karstene,gabi,ullip}@cs.tu-berlin.de 2 Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Spain [email protected] 3 Universidad Autonoma de Madrid, Spain [email protected] 4 Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Hungary {varro,gyapay}@mit.bme.hu {lengyel,tihamer}@aut.bme.hu Abstract. Graph transformation has been widely used for expressing model transformations. Especially transformations of visual models can be naturally formulated by graph transformations, since graphs are well suited to describe the underlying structures of models. Based on a com- mon sample model transformation, four different model transformation approaches are presented which all perform graph transformations. At first, a basic solution is presented and crucial points of model transforma- tions are indicated. Subsequent solutions focus mainly on the indicated problems. Finally, a first comparison of the chosen approaches to model transformation is presented where the main ingredients of each approach are summarized. 1 Introduction Raising the abstraction level from textual programming languages to visual mod- eling languages, model transformation techniques and tools have become more focused recently. Model transformation problems can be formulated as graph transformation problems, thus, a variety of tools choose this technique as the underlying mechanism for the transformation engine. This paper aims at com- paring four approaches to model transformation that apply graph transforma- tion techniques for model transformation. These can be characterized by their tool support. The presented tools are AGG [1], AToM3 [15], VIATRA2 [25] and VMTS [26] [16].
    [Show full text]
  • Model Transformations
    Model Transformations Modelling with UML, with semantics 271 What is a transformation? • A transformation is the automatic generation of a target model from a source model, according to a transformation definition. • A transformation definition is a set of transformation rules that together describe how a model in the source language can be transformed into a model in the target language. • A transformation rule is a description of how one or more constructs in the source language can be transformed into one or more constructs in the target language. • Unambiguous specifications of the way that (part of) one model can be used to create (part of) another model • Preferred characteristics of transformations • semantics-preserving Modelling with UML, with semantics 272 Model-to-model vs. Model-to-code • Model-to-model transformations Model ModelModel Meta-model • Transformations may be between different languages. In particular, between different languages defined by MOF Transformation Transformer Rules • Model-to-text transformations Model Meta-model • Special kind of model to model transformations optional, can be repeated • MDA TS to Grammar TS Code Transformer Generation Templates Manually Generated Code Written Code optional Modelling with UML, with semantics 273 Transformations as models • Treating everything as a model leads not only to conceptual simplicity and regular architecture, but also to implementation efficiency. • An implementation of a transformation language can be composed of a transformation virtual machine plus a metamodel-driven compiler. • The transformation VM allows uniform access to model and metamodel elements. MMa MMt MMb Ma Mt Mb Transformation Virtual Machine Modelling with UML, with semantics 274 Model transformation • Each model conforms to a metamodel.
    [Show full text]
  • Model Driven Software Engineering for Web Applications
    Model Driven Software Engineering for Web Applications Andreas Kraus Dissertation zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades des Doktors der Naturwissenschaften an der Fakultät für Mathematik, Informatik und Statistik der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München vorgelegt am 23.04.2007 Model Driven Software Engineering for Web Applications Tag der Einreichung: 23.04.2007 Tag des Rigorosums: 04.07.2007 Berichterstatter Prof. Dr. Rolf Hennicker (Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, München) Prof. Dr. Antonio Vallecillo (Universidad de Malaga, Spanien) 2 Model Driven Software Engineering for Web Applications Summary Model driven software engineering (MDSE) is becoming a widely accepted approach for developing complex applications and it is on its way to be one of the most promising para- digms in software engineering. MDSE advocates the use of models as the key artifacts in all phases of the development process, from analysis to design, implementation and testing. The most promising approach to model driven engineering is the Model Driven Architec- ture (MDA) defined by the Object Management Group (OMG). Applications are modeled at a platform independent level and are transformed to (possibly several) platform specific implementations. Model driven Web engineering (MDWE) is the application of model driven engineering to the domain of Web application development where it might be par- ticularly helpful because of the continuous evolution of Web technologies and platforms. However, most current approaches for MDWE provide only a partial application of the MDA pattern. Further, metamodels and transformations are not always made explicit and metamodels are often too general or do not contain sufficient information for the automatic code generation. Thus, the main goal of this work is the complete application of the MDA pattern to the Web application domain from analysis to the generated implementation, with transformations playing an important role at every stage of the development process.
    [Show full text]
  • Domain Specific Language Tool Development
    University of Latvia ELĪNA KALNIŅA MODEL TRANSFORMATION DEVELOPMENT USING MOLA MAPPINGS AND TEMPLATE MOLA Thesis for the PhD Degree at the University of Latvia Field: Computer Science Section: Programming Languages and Systems Scientific Advisor: Prof., Dr. Habil. Sc. Comp. AUDRIS KALNINS Riga – 2011 This work has been supported by the European Social Fund within the project «Support for Doctoral Studies at University of Latvia». Scientific Advisor: Professor, Dr. Sc. Comp. Audris Kalniņš Latvijas Universitāte Referees: Professor, Dr. Sc. Comp. Guntis Bārzdiņš University of Latvia Professor, Dr. Sc. Ing. Oksana Ņikiforova Riga Technical University Professor, Dr. Olegas Vasilecas Vilnius Gediminas Technical University (Vilnius, Lithuania) The defence of the thesis will take place in an open session of the Council of Promotion in Computer Science of the University of Latvia, in the Institute of Mathematics and Computer Science of the University of Latvia (Room 413, Raina Boulevard 29, Riga, Latvia) on March 7, 2012 at 4 PM. The thesis and its summary are available at the library of the University of Latvia (Kalpaka Boulevard 4, Riga, Latvia). 3 4 ABSTRACT Model transformation development for three specific domains: Model-Driven Software Development (MDSD), DSL tool development and transformation synthesis has been studied in the thesis. It is concluded that transformation development in domain- specific transformation languages is more straightforward and faster compared to traditional transformation languages. A domain-specific model transformation language has been developed for each studied domain. Two of them are based on mappings. In both cases it was concluded that mappings better fit for typical tasks and transformations better fit for non-standard tasks.
    [Show full text]
  • Visual Models Transformation in Metalanguage System Alexander O
    Advances in Information Science and Applications - Volume II Visual Models Transformation in MetaLanguage System Alexander O. Sukhov, Lyudmila N. Lyadova (DSMLs, DSLs), intended to solve a particular class of Abstract — At the process of creation and maintenance of problems in the specific domain. Unlike general purpose information systems the model-based approach to the software modeling languages, DSMLs are more expressive, simple in development is increasingly used. This approach allows to move the applying and easy to understand for different categories of focus from writing of the program code with using general purpose users as they operate with domain terms. To support the language to the models development with automatic generation of data structures and source code of applications. However at usage of process of development and maintenance of DSMLs the this approach it is necessary to transform models constructed by special type of software – language workbench (DSM- various categories of users at different stages of system creation with platform) – is used. usage of various modeling languages. An approach to models The various categories of specialists (programmers, system transformation in DSM platform MetaLanguage is considered. This analysts, database designers, domain experts, business approach allows fulfilling vertical and horizontal transformations of analysts, etc.) are involved in the process of information the designed models. The Metalanguage system support “model-text” and “model-model” types of transformations. The component of systems creation and maintenance. Often they need transformations is based on graph grammars described by production modification of modeling language description to customize rules. Transformations of model in Entity-Relationship notation are and adapt DSML to new conditions, requests of business and presented as example.
    [Show full text]