A constraint modeling framework for domain-specific languages
Authors: 
Patrick Pschorn, Pablo Oliveira Antonino, Andreas Morgenstern, Thomas KuhnAuthors Info & Claims
Patrick Pschorn, Pablo Oliveira Antonino, Andreas Morgenstern, Thomas KuhnAuthors Info & ClaimsPages 20 - 29
Abstract
The growing usage of Domain Specific Modeling Languages (DSML) for architecture view frameworks induces a need for automatic verification of non-functional model properties like completeness and consistency. However, we argue that the high demand for tailored architecture view frameworks is not complemented by appropriate constraint specification facilities. OCL is a common language for defining modeling constraints, but industry user reports indicate that despite its accuracy, it is too complex to be adopted in industrial scale. Approaches that were proposed to simplify the use of OCL either operate on technical formalisms or lack tool support to express new, or more complex types of constraints that can be validated automatically on the model. To address this challenge, we present a constraint modeling framework for the specification and validation of constraints on DSMLs. A Constraint Modeling Language (CML) created based on this framework provides a high level constraint specification en- vironment by using extensible template implementations to enable the automatic validation in computer aided software engineering (CASE) tools. We evaluate the approach in different industry projects and observe that using the proposed framework enhances understandability and effectiveness of constraint specification.
References
[1]
Nico Adler, Philipp Graf, and Klaus D Müller-Glaser. 2011. Model-based consistency checks of electric and electronic architectures against requirements. In International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems. Springer, 262–275.
[2]
Conrad Brock. 2005. UML 2 Activity and Action Models. Journal of Object Technology 4, 4 (2005), 43–66.
[3]
Jordi Cabot and Martin Gogolla. 2012. Object constraint language (OCL): a definitive guide. In Formal methods for model-driven engineering. Springer, 58–90.
[4]
Dolors Costal, Cristina Gómez, Anna Queralt, Ruth Raventós, and Ernest Teniente. 2008. Improving the definition of general constraints in UML. Software & Systems Modeling 7, 4 (2008), 469–486.
[5]
Birgit Demuth. 2004. The Dresden OCL toolkit and its role in Information Systems development. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Information Systems Development (ISD 2004), Vol. 7.
[6]
Peter H Feiler, David P Gluch, and John J Hudak. 2006. The architecture analysis & design language (AADL): An introduction. Technical Report. Carnegie-Mellon Univ Pittsburgh PA Software Engineering Inst.
[7]
Andrew Fish, John Howse, Gabriele Taentzer, and Jessica Winkelmann. 2005. Two visualizations of OCL: A comparison. University of Brighton.
[8]
Object Management Group. 2007. Unified Modeling Language. https: //www.omg.org/spec/UML/2.1.2 .
[9]
The Open Group. 2017. ArchiMate 3.0.1 Specification.
[10]
Vector Informatik. 2018. PREEVision. https://www.vector.com/int/en/ products/products-a-z/software/preevision/ . Accessed: 21.11.2018.
[11]
Steven Kelly, Matti Rossi, and Juha-Pekka Tolvanen. 2005. What is needed in a MetaCASE environment? Enterprise Modelling and Information Systems Architectures (EMISAJ) 1, 1 (2005), 25–35.
[12]
Steven Kelly and Juha-Pekka Tolvanen. 2008. Domain-specific modeling: enabling full code generation. John Wiley & Sons.
[13]
Dimitrios S Kolovos, Richard F Paige, and Fiona AC Polack. 2009. On the evolution of OCL for capturing structural constraints in modelling languages. In Rigorous Methods for Software Construction and Analysis. Springer, 204–218.
[14]
Janne Luoma, Steven Kelly, and Juha-Pekka Tolvanen. 2004. Defining domain-specific modeling languages: Collected experiences. In 4 th Workshop on Domain-Specific Modeling.
[15]
No Magic. 2018. MagicDraw 18.5 Documentation. https://docs. nomagic.com/display/MD185/MagicDraw+Documentation . Accessed: 05.11.2018.
[16]
MetaCase. 2017. MetaEdit+ 5.5 User’s Guide. https://www.metacase. com/support/55/manuals/ .
[17]
Andreas Morgenstern, Pablo Antonino, Thomas Kuhn, Patrick Pschorn, and Benno Kallweit. 2017. Modeling embedded systems using a tailored view framework and architecture modeling constraints. In Proceedings of the 11th European Conference on Software Architecture (ECSA). ACM, 180–186.
[18]
Pablo Oliveira Antonino de Assis. 2016. Improving the Consistency and Completeness of Safety Requirements Specifications. Fraunhofer Verlag, Stuttgart. ISBN:9783839610596; http://publica.fraunhofer.de/ documents/N-414851.html .
[19]
I Oya, M Füßling, P Oliveira Antonino, V Conforti, L Hagge, D Melkumyan, A Morgenstern, G Tosti, U Schwanke, J Schwarz, et al. 2016. The software architecture to control the Cherenkov Telescope Array. In Software and Cyberinfrastructure for Astronomy IV, Vol. 9913. International Society for Optics and Photonics, 991303.
[20]
Klaus Pohl, Harald Hönninger, Reinhold Achatz, and Manfred Broy. 2012. Model-Based Engineering of Embedded Systems: The SPES 2020 Methodology. Springer Science & Business Media.
[21]
Zdenek Rybola and Karel Richta. 2012. Validation of Stereotypes Usage in UML Class Model by Generated OCL Constraints. Informačné Technológie-Aplikácie a Teória (2012), 25.
[22]
Mandana Vaziri and Daniel Jackson. 2000. Some shortcomings of ocl, the object constraint language of uml. In TOOLS (34). 555–562.
[23]
Jos B Warmer and Anneke G Kleppe. 2003. The object constraint language: getting your models ready for MDA. Addison-Wesley Professional.
Index Terms
- A constraint modeling framework for domain-specific languages
Recommendations
Model-driven engineering with domain-specific meta-modelling languages
Domain-specific modelling languages are normally defined through general-purpose meta-modelling languages like the MOF. While this is satisfactory for many model-driven engineering (MDE) projects, several researchers have identified the need for domain-...
Notation-driven vs metamodel-driven development of domain-specific modeling languages: an empirical study
SAC '13: Proceedings of the 28th Annual ACM Symposium on Applied ComputingDomain-Specific Modeling Languages (DSMLs) enable domain experts to represent their knowledge through their own domain-specific notations. The Model-Driven Engineering (MDE) community proposes a metamodel-driven approach for the production of tools ...
Towards domain-specific property languages: the ProMoBox approach
DSM '13: Proceedings of the 2013 ACM workshop on Domain-specific modelingDomain-specific modeling (DSM) is one major building block of model-driven engineering. By moving from the solution space to the problem space, systems are designed by domain experts. The benefits of DSM are not unique to the design of systems, the ...
Comments
Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
October 2019
62 pages
ISBN:9781450369848
DOI:10.1145/3358501
- General Chairs:
- Jeff Gray,
- Matti Rossi,
- Jonathan Sprinkle,
- Juha-Pekka Tolvanen
Copyright © 2019 ACM.
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]
Sponsors
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery
New York, NY, United States
Publication History
Published: 20 October 2019
Check for updates
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Research-article
Conference
SPLASH '19
Sponsor:
Acceptance Rates
Overall Acceptance Rate 31 of 50 submissions, 62%
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 103Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)5
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 11 Feb 2025
Other Metrics
Citations
View Options
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign in