Rearchitecting the UML infrastructure

ABSTRACT

Metamodeling is one of the core foundations of computer-automated multiparadigm modeling. However, there is currently little agreement about what form the required metamodeling approach should take and precisely what role metamodels should play. This article addresses the problem by first describing some fundamental problems in the industry's leading metamodeling technology, the UML framework, and then explaining how this framework could be rearchitected to overcome these problems. Three main issues are identified in the current framework: the dual classification problem arising from the need to capture both the logical and physical classification of model elements, the class/object duality problem arising from the need to capture both the classlike and objectlike facets of some model elements, and the replication of concepts problem arising from the need to define certain concepts multiple times. Three main proposals for rearchitecting the UML framework to overcome these problems are then presented: the separation of logical and physical classification dimensions, the unification of the class and object facets of model elements, and the enhancement of the instantiation mechanism to allow definitions to transcend multiple levels. The article concludes with a discussion of other practical issues involved in rearchitecting the UML modeling framework in the proposed way.

REFERENCES

• 1: José M. Álvarez , Andy Evans , Paul Sammut, Mapping between Levels in the Metamodel Architecture, Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on The Unified Modeling Language, Modeling Languages, Concepts, and Tools, p.34-46, October 01-05, 2001
• 2: Atkinson, C. and Kühne, T. 2000. Strict profiles: Why and how. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on the Unified Modeling Language, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 1939, 309--322.
• 3: Atkinson, C. and Kühne, T. 2001a. Processes and products in a multi-level metamodeling architecture. Int. J. Softw. Eng. Knowl. Eng. 11, 6, 761--783.
• 4: Colin Atkinson , Thomas Kühne, The Essence of Multilevel Metamodeling, Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on The Unified Modeling Language, Modeling Languages, Concepts, and Tools, p.19-33, October 01-05, 2001
• 5: Jean Bézivin , Olivier Gerbé, Towards a Precise Definition of the OMG/MDA Framework, Proceedings of the 16th IEEE international conference on Automated software engineering, p.273, November 26-29, 2001
• 6: CDIF Technical Committee. 1994. CDIF Framework for modeling and extensibility, Electronic Industries Association, EIA/IS-107, January.
• 7: Evans, A. S., and Kent, S. 1999. Meta-modeling semantics of UML: The pUML approach. In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on the Unified Modeling Language, B. Rumpe and R. B. France, Eds., Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 1723.
• 8: Erich Gamma , Richard Helm , Ralph Johnson , John Vlissides, Design patterns: elements of reusable object-oriented software, Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Boston, MA, 1995
• 9: Geisler, R., Klar, M., and Pons, C. 1998. Dimensions and dichotomy in metamodeling. In Proceedings of the Third BCS-FACS Northern Formal Methods Workshop (September). Springer-Verlag, New York.
• 10: D. Harel , B. Rumpe, Modeling Languages: Syntax, Semantics and All That Stuff, Part I: The Basic Stuff, Weizmann Science Press of Israel, Jerusalem, Israel, 2000
• 11: Henderson-Sellers, B. 2002. The use of subtypes and stereotypes in the UML model. J. Database Manage. 13, 2, 43--50.
• 12: Brian Henderson-Sellers , A. Bulthuis, Object-Oriented Metamethods, Springer-Verlag New York, Inc., Secaucus, NJ, 1997
• 13: Ralph Johnson , Bobby Woolf, Type object, Pattern languages of program design 3, Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Boston, MA, 1997
• 14: Cris Kobryn, UML 2001: a standardization odyssey, Communications of the ACM, v.42 n.10, p.29-37, Oct. 1999 [doi>10.1145/317665.317673]
• 15: Mili, H. and Pachet, F. 1998. Patterns for metamodeling. Available at http://citeseer.nj. nec.com/44259.html.
• 16: Odell, J. 1994. Power types. J. Object-Orient Program. (May).
• 17: OMG. 2001. OMG Unified Modeling Language specification, version 1.4. OMG document ad/00-11-01.
• 18: Dirk Riehle , Steven Fraleigh , Dirk Bucka-Lassen , Nosa Omorogbe, The architecture of a UML virtual machine, Proceedings of the 16th ACM SIGPLAN conference on Object oriented programming, systems, languages, and applications, p.327-341, October 14-18, 2001, Tampa Bay, FL, USA

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  D. Software
  D.1 PROGRAMMING TECHNIQUES
      D.1.5 Object-oriented Programming

Additional Classification:
  D. Software
  D.2 SOFTWARE ENGINEERING
        D.2.11 Software Architectures
  D.3 PROGRAMMING LANGUAGES
      D.3.3 Language Constructs and Features
          Subjects: Classes and objects

  H. Information Systems
  H.1 MODELS AND PRINCIPLES
      H.1.1 Systems and Information Theory

General Terms:
Design, Languages, Standardization

Keywords:
Metamodeling, UML infrastructure, classification, classification dimensions, deep instantiation, strict metamodeling, unified modeling language