Reconciling diagrams after executing model transformations

ABSTRACT

In this paper we discuss how to create and update diagrams after the execution of a model transformation. This is achieved by creating an independent diagram reconciliation tool component that is based on a mapping language from the abstract syntax to the concrete syntax of a modeling language. This approach allows us to decouple model transformation from diagram handling in model transformation languages and tools.

REFERENCES

• 1: D. H. Akehurst , Stuart Kent, A Relational Approach to Defining Transformations in a Metamodel, Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on The Unified Modeling Language, p.243-258, September 30-October 04, 2002
• 2: Marcus Alanen, Torbjörn Lundkvist, and Ivan Porres. A Mapping Language from Models to XMI{DI} Diagrams. Technical Report 676, Turku Centre for Computer Science, April 2005.
• 3: Marcus Alanen and Ivan Porres. Difference and Union of Models. In Perdita Stevens, Jon Whittle, and Grady Booch, editors, UML 2003 - The Unified Modeling Language, volume 2863 of LNCS, pages 2--17. Spinger-Verlag, Oct 2003.
• 4: J. Bézivin. On the Unification Power of Models. Springer Journal on Software and Systems Modeling, 3(4), 2004.
• 5: J. Bézivin, E. Breton, G. Dupé, and P. Valduriez. The ATL transformation-based model management framework. Technical Report 03.08, IRIN Univesité de Nantes, 2003.
• 6: Jordi Cabot and Ernest Teniente. Determining the Structural Events that May Violate an Integrity Constraint. In Thomas Baar, Alfred Strohmeier, Ana Moreira, and Stephen J. Mellor, editors, UML 2004 - The Unified Modeling Language. Model Languages and Applications. 7th International Conference, Lisbon, Portugal, volume 3273 of LNCS, pages 320--334. Springer, October 2004.
• 7: Jordi Cabot and Ernest Teniente. Computing the Relevant Instances that May Violate an OCL Constraint. In Oscar Pastor and João Falcão e Cunha, editors, Advanced Information Systems Engineering, 17th International Conference, CAiSE 2005, Porto, Portugal, volume 3520 of LNCS, pages 48--62. Springer, June 2005.
• 8: Rodolfo Castello , Rym Mili , Ioannis G. Tollis, Automatic layout of statecharts, Software—Practice & Experience, v.32 n.1, p.25-55, January, 2002 [doi>10.1002/spe.418]
• 9: Edgars Celms, Audris Kalnins, and Lelde Lace. Diagram Definition Facilities Based on Metamodel Mappings, October 2003. Invited talk at the Third OOPSLA Workshop on Domain-Specific Modeling.
• 10: Markus Eiglsperger , Michael Kaufmann , Martin Siebenhaller, A topology-shape-metrics approach for the automatic layout of UML class diagrams, Proceedings of the 2003 ACM symposium on Software visualization, June 11-13, 2003, San Diego, California [doi>10.1145/774833.774860]
• 11: EMF Development team. Eclipse Modeling Framework. www.eclipse.org/emf.
• 12: Frédéric Fondement and Thomas Baar. Making Metamodels Aware of Concrete Syntax. In European Conference on Model Driven Architecture (ECMDA), volume 3748 of LNCS, pages 190--204, 2005.
• 13: Gentleware. The Poseidon for UML product. http://www.gentleware.com/.
• 14: Jan Hendrik Hausmann , Stuart Kent, Visualizing model mappings in UML, Proceedings of the 2003 ACM symposium on Software visualization, June 11-13, 2003, San Diego, California [doi>10.1145/774833.774858]
• 15: Audris Kalnins, Janis Barzdins, and Edgars Celms. Basics of Model Transformation Language MOLA. In Workshop on Model Transformation and Execution in the Context of MDA (ECOOP 2004), June 2004.
• 16: Stuart Kent, Model Driven Engineering, Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Integrated Formal Methods, p.286-298, May 15-18, 2002
• 17: Eugene W. Myers. An O(ND) Difference Algorithm and Its Variations. Algorithmica, 1(2):251--266, 1986.
• 18: OMG. MOF 2.0 Query / Views / Transformations RFP. OMG Document ad/02-04-10. Available at www.omg.org, 2002.
• 19: OMG. MOF 2.0 Core Final Adopted Specification, October 2003. Document ptc/03-10-04, available at http://www.omg.org/.
• 20: OMG. UML 2.0 Infrastructure Specification, September 2003. Document ptc/03-09-15, available at http://www.omg.org/.
• 21: OMG. UML 2.0 OCL Specification, Ocober 2003. OMG document ptc/03-10-14, available at http://www.omg.org/.
• 22: OMG. Unified Modeling Language: Diagram Interchange version 2.0, July 2003. OMG document ptc/03-07-03. Available at http://www.omg.org.
• 23: Octavian Patrascoiu. YATL: Yet Another Transformation Language. In Proceedings of the 1st European MDA Workshop, MDA-IA, pages 83--90. University of Twente, the Nederlands, January 2004.
• 24: Ivan Porres. A Toolkit for Model Manipulation. Springer International Journal on Software and Systems Modeling, 2(4), 2003.
• 25: Dániel Varró. Automatic Program Generation for and by Model Transformation Systems. In Hans-Jörg Kreowski and Peter Knirsch, editors, Proc. AGT 2002: Workshop on Applied Graph Transformation, pages 161--173, Grenoble, France, April 12--13 2002.
• 26: W3C. Scalable vector graphics (svg) 1.1 specification. Available at http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG/.

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  D. Software
  D.2 SOFTWARE ENGINEERING
      D.2.2 Design Tools and Techniques
          Subjects: State diagrams

Additional Classification:
  D. Software
  D.2 SOFTWARE ENGINEERING
      D.2.1 Requirements/Specifications
          Subjects: Methodologies (e.g., object-oriented, structured)

  I. Computing Methodologies
  I.2 ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
      I.2.2 Automatic Programming
          Subjects: Program transformation
  I.6 SIMULATION AND MODELING
      I.6.5 Model Development
          Subjects: Modeling methodologies

General Terms:
Design, Management

Keywords:
XMI[DI], diagram interchange, model transformation, visual languages