DOCSLIB.ORG

Event Driven Architecture Modelling and Simulation

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Event Driven Architecture Modelling and Simulation Event Driven Architecture Modelling and Simulation Tony Clark, Balbir S. Barn School of Engineering and Information Sciences Middlesex University, London, UK {t.n.clark,b.barn}@mdx.ac.uk Abstract—Enterprise Architecture (EA) Modelling aims to Given that EDA and CEP are claimed to be more flexible analyze an organization in terms of its components, IT systems than SOA, how should we design and verify an EA using and business processes. Current modelling approaches are based these concepts? Some specialized languages for CEP exist, on Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) whereby components publish interfaces of operations that are used via message passing. however they are specifically designed to efficiently process It has been argued that SOA leads to tight coupling between com- relatively simple event streams, and do not integrate into a ponents and does not handle complex component interactions, component architecture required by EA. The most widely used with resulting maintenance difficulties. Event Driven Architecture language for modelling systems is UML, however UML does (EDA) is an alternative strategy, based on listening for events, not provide any specific support for this type of EA. that is designed to address SOA shortcomings. However, there are no EA modelling technologies based on EDA. This paper The contribution of this paper is to identify the key charac- reviews EA, SOA and EDA, identifies EDA characteristic features teristic features of EDA and to use them as the basis for both and proposes modelling and simulation technologies that are an EDA modelling notation and a simulation language where introduced through a simple case study. no such technology currently exists. The modelling notation is defined as a UML class diagram stereotype and an extension of I. INTRODUCTION OCL that supports event processing. The simulation notation is Enterprise Architecture (EA) describes a collection of ap- defined as an action language for the modelling notation. The proaches that support the design and analysis of an IT infras- simulation language has been implemented as an interpreter tructure and how it relates to the goals, directives, processes in Java. and organization of a business. There are various approaches to The paper is structured as follows. Section II reviews com- organizing an architecture, but most involve the identification plex event processing and EA modelling languages. Section III of logical or physical business units, or components, that man- performs a domain analysis on EDA and describes an EDA age their own data and resources, implement a collection of modelling language. Section IV describes a case study as an business processes, and communicate with other components EDA model. Section V describes an EDA simulation language using a variety of message passing styles. and provides an example by implementing the case study. Different styles of message passing lead to different types The simulation language has been implemented in Java and of architecture. A Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) in- is described in section VI. volves the publication of logically coherent groups of business functionality as interfaces, that can be used by components II. EVENT DRIVEN EA using synchronous or asynchronous messaging. An alternative A. Service Oriented Architecture style, argued as reducing coupling between components and thereby increasing the scope for component reuse, is Event Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) organizes a system Driven Architecture (EDA) whereby components are event in terms of components that communicate via operations or generators and consumers. EDA is arguably more realistic in a services. Components publish services that they implement sophisticated, dynamic, modern business environment, and can as business processes. Interaction amongst components is be viewed as a specialization of SOA where communication achieved through orchestration at a local level or choreography between components is performed with respect to a single at a global level. generic event interface. Its proponents argue that SOA provides loose coupling, An important difference between SOA and EDA is that the location transparency and protocol independence [1] when latter generally provides scope for Complex Event Processing compared to more traditional implementation techniques. The (CEP) where the business processes within a component are organization of systems into coherent interfaces has been triggered by multiple, possibly temporally related, events. In argued [2] as having disadvantages in terms of: extensions; SOA there is no notion of relating the invocation of a single accommodating new business functions; associating single business process to a condition holding between the data business processes with complex multi-component interac- passed to a collection of calls on one of the component’s tions. These can be addressed in terms of CEP as described interfaces. in the next section. B. Complex Event Processing backtracking to find solutions to goals. Complex Event Processing (CEP) [3] can be used to process C. Enterprise Architecture events that are generated from implementation-level systems Enterprise Architecture (EA) aims to capture the essentials by aggregation and transformation in order to discover the of a business, its IT and its evolution, and to support analysis business level, actionable information behind all these data. It of this information: ‘[it is] a coherent whole of principles, has evolved into the paradigm of choice for the development methods, and models that are used in the design and realization of monitoring and reactive applications [4]. of an enterprise’s organizational structure, business processes, CEP can be viewed as a specialization of SOA where information systems and infrastructure.’ [10]. components are decoupled from multiple interfaces and where A key objective of EA is being able to provide a holistic each component implements a single generic event interface. understanding of all aspects of a business, connecting the Components both raise and handle events in terms of this business drivers and the surrounding business environment, interface and therefore it is more flexible in terms of extension through the business processes, organizational units, roles and maintenance. In addition, CEP implements events in terms and responsibilities, to the underlying IT systems that the of business rules compared to SOA that implements operations business relies on. In addition to presenting a coherent ex- using business processes. Typically, a business rule can depend planation of the what, why and how of a business, EA aims on multiple, possibly temporally related, events, whereas a to support specific types of business analysis including [11], business process is invoked on receipt of a single operation [12], [13], [14], [15]: alignment between business functions request. Therefore, SOA can implement CEP by enforcing and IT systems; business change describing the current state a single operation interface across an architecture and by of a business (as-is) and a desired state of a business (to- providing special machinery to aggregate multiple operation be); maintenance the de-installation and disposal, upgrading, calls. procurement and integration of systems including the pri- There are various proposals for how complex events can be oritization of maintenance needs; quality by managing and used efficiently to process streams of data such as those gener- determining the quality attributes for aspects of the business ated in applications including hotel booking systems, banking such as security, performance to ensure a certain level of on-line credit systems, business activity monitoring (BAM), quality to meet the needs of the business; acquisition and real-time stock analysis, and real-time security analysis. Most mergers describing the alignment of businesses and the effect proposals aim to address efficiency issues related to the scale on both when they merge; compliance in terms of a regulatory and frequency of the information that is generated [5]. The framework, e.g. Sarbanes-Oxley; strategic planning including current state of the art is described in [6] where the key corporate strategy planning, business process optimization, features of an event driven architecture (EDA) are outlined as business continuity planning, IT management. including an architecture diagram showing the processes of the EA has its origins in Zachman’s original EA framework system and their interconnections, a behaviour specification [16] while other leading examples include the Open Group including the rules used to process events and to control data, Architecture Framework (TOGAF) [17] and the framework and the specification of inter-process communications. promulgated by the Department of Defense (DoDAF) [18]. As described in [7] events can be extracted from services, In addition to frameworks that describe the nature of models databases, RFID and activities. The events are processed by required for EA, modelling languages specifically designed for rules that detect relationships between event properties and EA have also emerged. One leading architecture modelling the times at which the events occur. Each rule matches against language is ArchiMate [19]. multiple events that occur from a variety of sources and, when As described in [20] and [21], complex events can be the all required events have been matched, the rule performs a basis for a style of EA design. Event Driven Architecture business action.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Sysml Distilled: a Brief Guide to the Systems Modeling Language
    ptg11539604 Praise for SysML Distilled “In keeping with the outstanding tradition of Addison-Wesley’s techni- cal publications, Lenny Delligatti’s SysML Distilled does not disappoint. Lenny has done a masterful job of capturing the spirit of OMG SysML as a practical, standards-based modeling language to help systems engi- neers address growing system complexity. This book is loaded with matter-of-fact insights, starting with basic MBSE concepts to distin- guishing the subtle differences between use cases and scenarios to illu- mination on namespaces and SysML packages, and even speaks to some of the more esoteric SysML semantics such as token flows.” — Jeff Estefan, Principal Engineer, NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory “The power of a modeling language, such as SysML, is that it facilitates communication not only within systems engineering but across disci- plines and across the development life cycle. Many languages have the ptg11539604 potential to increase communication, but without an effective guide, they can fall short of that objective. In SysML Distilled, Lenny Delligatti combines just the right amount of technology with a common-sense approach to utilizing SysML toward achieving that communication. Having worked in systems and software engineering across many do- mains for the last 30 years, and having taught computer languages, UML, and SysML to many organizations and within the college setting, I find Lenny’s book an invaluable resource. He presents the concepts clearly and provides useful and pragmatic examples to get you off the ground quickly and enables you to be an effective modeler.” — Thomas W. Fargnoli, Lead Member of the Engineering Staff, Lockheed Martin “This book provides an excellent introduction to SysML.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to Systems Modeling Languages
    Fundamentals of Systems Engineering Prof. Olivier L. de Weck, Mark Chodas, Narek Shougarian Session 3 System Modeling Languages 1 Reminder: A1 is due today ! 2 3 Overview Why Systems Modeling Languages? Ontology, Semantics and Syntax OPM – Object Process Methodology SySML – Systems Modeling Language Modelica What does it mean for Systems Engineering of today and tomorrow (MBSE)? 4 Exercise: Describe the “Mr. Sticky” System Work with a partner (5 min) Use your webex notepad/white board I will call on you randomly We will compare across student teams © source unknown. All rights reserved. This content is excluded from our Creative Commons license. For more information, see http://ocw.mit.edu/help/faq-fair-use/. 5 Why Systems Modeling Languages? Means for describing artifacts are traditionally as follows: Natural Language (English, French etc….) Graphical (Sketches and Drawings) These then typically get aggregated in “documents” Examples: Requirements Document, Drawing Package Technical Data Package (TDP) should contain all info needed to build and operate system Advantages of allowing an arbitrary description: Familiarity to creator of description Not-confining, promotes creativity Disadvantages of allowing an arbitrary description: Room for ambiguous interpretations and errors Difficult to update if there are changes Handoffs between SE lifecycle phases are discontinuous Uneven level of abstraction Large volume of information that exceeds human cognitive bandwidth Etc…. 6 System Modeling Languages Past efforts
    [Show full text]
  • UML Model to Fault Tree Model Transformation for Dependability
    ! ! UML Model to Fault Tree Model Transformation for Dependability Analysis ! ! ! ! ! by Zhao Zhao ! ! ! ! ! A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Affairs in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of ! ! ! ! Master of Applied Science in Electrical and Computer Engineering ! ! ! ! ! Department of System and Computer Engineering Carleton University Ottawa, ON, Canada ! ! ! ! ! August 2014 ©Copyright2014, Zhao Zhao ! ! !I ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I would like to express my thank to all those who helped me during the writing of this thesis. My deepest gratitude goes first and foremost to my thesis supervisor, Prof. Dorina Petriu. It was only through her valuable supervision and patient guidance that I was able to complete all the work of this thesis. I would also like to thank my family, my father and my mother, and all my friends for their continuous support and encouragement. ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !II ABSTRACT Model-Driven Development (MDD) is a software development paradigm that has shifted the focus of software development from code to models. MDD’s emphasis on mod- els facilitates also the derivation of analysis models for different software non-functional properties (NFPs) from the software design models. Such analysis models are based on dif- ferent formalisms, and can be used to verify the NFPs of the software under development starting in the early lifecycle stages. This thesis proposes a model transformation to automatically generate Fault Tree models from UML models annotated with dependability annotations. Fault tree analysis is a top down deductive failure analysis model using both qualitative and quantitative analysis of undesired events of a system. It is used in safety and reliability engineering.
    [Show full text]
  • Executable Statemachines
    Enterprise Architect User Guide Series Executable StateMachines How to simulate State models? In Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect, Executable StateMachines provide complete language-specific implementations to rapidly generate, execute and simulate complex State models on multiple software products and platforms. Author: Sparx Systems Date: 21/12/2018 Version: 1.0 CREATED WITH Table of Contents Executable StateMachines 4 Executable StateMachine Artifact 9 Modeling Executable StateMachines 13 Code Generation for Executable StateMachines 25 Debugging Execution of Executable StateMachines 37 Execution and Simulation of Executable StateMachines 41 Example: Simulation Commands 43 Example: Simulation in HTML with JavaScript 58 CD Player 60 Regular Expression Parser 68 Entering a State 71 Example: Fork and Join 86 Example: Deferred Event Pattern 93 Example: Entry and Exit Points (Connection Point References) 103 Example: History Pseudostate 110 Example Executable StateMachine 125 User Guide - Executable StateMachines 21 December, 2018 Executable StateMachines Executable StateMachines provide a powerful means of rapidly generating, executing and simulating complex state models. In contrast to dynamic simulation of State Charts using Enterprise Architect's Simulation engine, Executable StateMachines provide a complete language-specific implementation that can form the behavioral 'engine' for multiple software products on multiple platforms. Visualization of the execution uses and integrates seamlessly with the Simulation capability. Evolution of the model now presents fewer coding challenges. The code generation, compilation and execution is taken care of by Enterprise Architect. For those having particular requirements, each language is provided with a set of code templates. Templates can be customized by you to tailor the generated code in any ways you see fit. These topics introduce you to the basics of modeling Executable StateMachines and tell you how to generate and simulate them.
    [Show full text]
  • Modeling Event-Based Communication in Component-Based Software Architectures for Performance Predictions
    Journal on Software and Systems Modeling manuscript No. (will be inserted by the editor) Modeling Event-based Communication in Component-based Software Architectures for Performance Predictions Christoph Rathfelder1, Benjamin Klatt1, Kai Sachs2, Samuel Kounev3? 1 FZI Research Center for Information Technology Karlsruhe, Germany frathfelder; [email protected] 2 SAP AG Walldorf, Germany [email protected] 3 Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT) Karlsruhe, Germany [email protected] Received: date / Revised version: date Abstract Event-based communication is used in dif- 1 Introduction ferent domains including telecommunications, transporta- tion, and business information systems to build scal- The event-based communication paradigm is used in- able distributed systems. Such systems typically have creasingly often to build loosely-coupled distributed sys- stringent requirements for performance and scalability as tems in many different industry domains. The applica- they provide business and mission critical services. While tion areas of event-based systems range from distributed the use of event-based communication enables loosely- sensor-based systems up to large-scale business infor- coupled interactions between components and leads to mation systems [24]. Compared to synchronous com- improved system scalability, it makes it much harder for munication using, for example, remote procedure calls developers to estimate the system's behavior and perfor- (RPC), event-based communication among components mance under load due to the decoupling of components promises several benefits such as high scalability and ex- and control flow. In this paper, we present our approach tendability [25]. Being asynchronous in nature, it allows enabling the modeling and performance prediction of a send-and-forget approach, i.e., a component that sends event-based systems at the architecture level.
    [Show full text]
  • Tackling Design Patterns Chapter 10: UML State Diagrams Copyright C 2016 by Linda Marshall and Vreda Pieterse
    Department of Computer Science Tackling Design Patterns Chapter 10: UML State Diagrams Copyright c 2016 by Linda Marshall and Vreda Pieterse. All rights reserved. Contents 10.1 Introduction ................................. 2 10.2 Notational Elements ............................ 2 10.2.1 State Nodes . 2 10.2.2 Transition edges . 3 10.2.3 Control Nodes . 4 10.2.4 Actions . 5 10.2.5 Signals . 5 10.2.6 Composite States . 6 10.3 Examples ................................... 6 10.4 Exercises ................................... 7 References ....................................... 8 1 10.1 Introduction UML State diagrams are used to describe the behaviour of nontrivial objects. State diagrams are good for describing the behaviour of one object over time and are used to identify object attributes and to refine the behaviour description of an object. A state is a condition in which an object can be at some point during its lifetime, for some finite period of time [4]. State diagrams describe all the possible states a particular object can get into and how the objects state changes as a result of external events that reach the object [1]. The notation for state diagrams was first introduced by Harel [2], and then adopted by UML. 10.2 Notational Elements A UML State diagram is a graph in the mathematical sense of the word. It is a diagram consisting of nodes and edges. The nodes can assume a variety of forms each with specific meaning, while the edges are labeled arrows connecting these nodes. In Section 10.2.1 we discuss the basic nodes. The basic nodes are called state nodes. In Section 10.2.2 we discuss the syntax for the edges.
    [Show full text]
  • Case No COMP/M.4747 Œ IBM / TELELOGIC REGULATION (EC)
    EN This text is made available for information purposes only. A summary of this decision is published in all Community languages in the Official Journal of the European Union. Case No COMP/M.4747 – IBM / TELELOGIC Only the English text is authentic. REGULATION (EC) No 139/2004 MERGER PROCEDURE Article 8(1) Date: 05/03/2008 Brussels, 05/03/2008 C(2008) 823 final PUBLIC VERSION COMMISSION DECISION of 05/03/2008 declaring a concentration to be compatible with the common market and the EEA Agreement (Case No COMP/M.4747 - IBM/ TELELOGIC) COMMISSION DECISION of 05/03/2008 declaring a concentration to be compatible with the common market and the EEA Agreement (Case No COMP/M.4747 - IBM/ TELELOGIC) (Only the English text is authentic) (Text with EEA relevance) THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, and in particular Article 57 thereof, Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 of 20 January 2004 on the control of concentrations between undertakings1, and in particular Article 8(1) thereof, Having regard to the Commission's decision of 3 October 2007 to initiate proceedings in this case, After consulting the Advisory Committee on Concentrations2, Having regard to the final report of the Hearing Officer in this case3, Whereas: 1 OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 2 OJ C ...,...200. , p.... 3 OJ C ...,...200. , p.... 2 I. INTRODUCTION 1. On 29 August 2007, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 and following a referral pursuant to Article 4(5) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 ("the Merger Regulation") by which the undertaking International Business Machines Corporation ("IBM", USA) acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Council Regulation control of the whole of the undertaking Telelogic AB ("Telelogic", Sweden) by way of a public bid which was announced on 11 June 2007.
    [Show full text]
  • The UML Profile for Communicating Systems DRAFT October 18, 2004
    The UML Profile for Communicating Systems DRAFT October 18, 2004 Copyright © 1997-2003 ETSI. IPRs essential or potentially essential to the present document may have been declared to ETSI. The information pertaining to these essential IPRs, if any, is publicly available for ETSI members and non-members, and can be found in ETSIÂSRÂ000Â314: "Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs); Essential, or potentially Essential, IPRs notified to ETSI in respect of ETSI standards", which is available from the ETSI Secretariat. Latest updates are available on the ETSI Web server (http://webapp.etsi.org/IPR/home.asp). All published ETSI deliverables shall include information which directs the reader to the above source of information. This Technical Specification (TS) has been produced by ETSI Technical Committee. How to Read this Specification 2 Acknowledgements 2 Overview 5 Methodological Aspects 5 Class Diagram 6 State Machine Diagram 7 Composite Structure Diagram 8 Relationship Between Diagrams 9 Overview 5 Active Class 5 Description 5 Attributes 5 Constraints 5 Semantics 5 Notation 5 Passive Class 5 Description 5 Attributes 5 Constraints 6 Semantics 6 Notation 6 Interface 6 Description 6 Constraints 6 Semantics 6 Notation 6 Signal 6 Description 6 Attributes 6 Semantics 6 Notation 7 Directed Association 7 Description 7 Attributes 7 Constraints 7 Semantics 7 Notation 7 Composition 7 Description 7 Attributes 7 xxx 7 Constraints 7 Semantics 8 UML Profile for Communicating Systems 1 Notation 8 Generalisation 8 Description 8 Attributes 8 Constraints 8 Semantics
    [Show full text]
  • Modelling and Transformation of Non-Functional Annotations
    Modelling and Transformation of Non-Functional Annotations Modelling and Transformation of Non-Functional Annotations Jorge Ibarra Delgado School of Computer Science University of St. Andrews June 24, 2015 1/32 Modelling and Transformation of Non-Functional Annotations Context Plan 1 Context Introduction Objectives 2 PlantNF 3 PlantNF-to-UPPAAL Transformation Tool 2/32 Modelling and Transformation of Non-Functional Annotations Context Introduction Modelling An abstract description of an artefact Key elements of a new or existing system Different stakeholders can verify and evaluate requirements helps enabling the reuse of components 3/32 Modelling and Transformation of Non-Functional Annotations Context Introduction Modelling Informal Methods Easy to learn and apply Too much expressiveness UML, boxes connected by lines 4/32 Modelling and Transformation of Non-Functional Annotations Context Introduction Modelling Informal Methods 4/32 Modelling and Transformation of Non-Functional Annotations Context Introduction Modelling Formal Methods Requires more intellectual effort Construction by applying semantical rules Event-B, PROMELA, UPPAAL, MoDeST 5/32 Modelling and Transformation of Non-Functional Annotations Context Introduction Modelling Formal Methods 5/32 Modelling and Transformation of Non-Functional Annotations Context Introduction Model Transformation Used to generate models of different kind Use of a target model which can be formally verified Examples of target models are Petri nets and timed automata 6/32 Our approach: Explore the use
    [Show full text]
  • Modeling with UML Chapter 2, Part 3 Activity Diagrams Activity Diagrams
    Activity Diagrams • Describe the behavior of a system in terms of activities • Represent the sequencing and coordination of actions or steps, Modeling with UML similar to a control flow graph. Chapter 2, part 3 CS 4354 • Activity: Rounded rectangles represent actions called activities. Summer II 2015 • Edges between activities represent control flow. Jill Seaman ✦branching, looping, concurrency • Activity diagrams can be hierarchical: ✦A given activity in a rounded rectangle could be further detailed in its own separate activity diagram. 1 2 Activity Diagrams: Branching • Decisions (branches, alternates) ✦Branch Node: diamond with one incoming arrow two or more outgoing arrows. ✦Outgoing edges are labeled with guards (conditions in square brackets) that select that arrow when the condition is true. ✦[else] can be used as a guard. ✦Merge nodes (diamond with many incoming, one outgoing arrow) to mark the end of the branching. ✦The diamonds are sometimes omitted, but should be included for clarity. 3 4 Decision in the Handle Incident process. Activity Diagrams: Concurrency • Fork nodes and Join nodes (concurrency) ✦The fork is a line with one incoming edge and several outgoing edges. ✦Fork: denotes splitting control into multiple threads, representing the fact that each outgoing edge can be done in parallel. ✦The join is a line with many incoming edges and one outgoing edge. ✦Join: denotes synchronizing threads back into one (waiting until all of the incoming activities are completed before moving forward). ✦Fork and Join denote activities that may be done in any order (they are not required to be done concurrently). 5 6 Concurrency in incident management process.
    [Show full text]
  • Com.Telelogic.Rhapsody.Core
    com.telelogic.rhapsody.core Package Class Use Tree Serialized Deprecated Index Help PREV PACKAGE NEXT PACKAGE FRAMES NO FRAMES All Classes Package com.telelogic.rhapsody.core Interface Summary The IRPAcceptEventAction interface represents Accept Event IRPAcceptEventAction Action elements in a statechart or activity diagram. The IRPAcceptTimeEvent interface represents Accept Time Event IRPAcceptTimeEvent elements in activity diagrams and statecharts. The IRPAction interface represents the action defined for a IRPAction transition in a statechart. The IRPActionBlock interface represents action blocks in IRPActionBlock sequence diagrams. The IRPActivityDiagram interface represents activity diagrams in IRPActivityDiagram Rational Rhapsody models. IRPActor The IRPActor interface represents actors in Rhapsody models. The IRPAnnotation interface represents the different types of IRPAnnotation annotations you can add to your model - notes, comments, constraints, and requirements. The IRPApplication interface represents the Rhapsody application, IRPApplication and its methods reflect many of the commands that you can access from the Rhapsody menu bar. The IRPArgument interface represents an argument of an IRPArgument operation or an event. IRPASCIIFile The IRPAssociationClass interface represents association classes IRPAssociationClass in Rational Rhapsody models. The IRPAssociationRole interface represents the association roles IRPAssociationRole that link objects in communication diagrams. The IRPAttribute interface represents attributes of
    [Show full text]
  • Efficient Generation of Graphical Model Views Via Lazy Model-To-Text Transformation
    This is a repository copy of Efficient Generation of Graphical Model Views via Lazy Model- to-Text Transformation. White Rose Research Online URL for this paper: https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/164209/ Version: Accepted Version Proceedings Paper: Kolovos, Dimitris orcid.org/0000-0002-1724-6563, De La Vega, Alfonso and Cooper, Justin (Accepted: 2020) Efficient Generation of Graphical Model Views via Lazy Model-to-Text Transformation. In: ACM/IEEE 23rd International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems (MODELS ’20). (In Press) Reuse Items deposited in White Rose Research Online are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved unless indicated otherwise. They may be downloaded and/or printed for private study, or other acts as permitted by national copyright laws. The publisher or other rights holders may allow further reproduction and re-use of the full text version. This is indicated by the licence information on the White Rose Research Online record for the item. Takedown If you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing [email protected] including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request. [email protected] https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/ Efficient Generation of Graphical Model Views via Lazy Model-to-Text Transformation Dimitris Kolovos Alfonso de la Vega Justin Cooper Department of Computer Science Department of Computer Science Department of Computer Science University of York University of York University of York York, UK York, UK York, UK [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] ABSTRACT transforming them into textual formats such as Graphviz, Plan- Producing graphical views from software and system models is tUML, SVG and HTML, which are subsequently rendered in an often desirable for communication and comprehension purposes, embedded browser.
    [Show full text]