publication . Conference object . Part of book or chapter of book . 2005

Extending Profiles with Stereotypes for Composite Concepts

Quartel, Dick; Dijkman, R.M.; van Sinderen, Marten J.; Briand, L.; Williams, C.;
Open Access
  • Published: 01 Oct 2005
  • Publisher: Springer
  • Country: Netherlands
This paper proposes an extension of the UML 2.0 profiling mechanism. This extension facilitates a language designer to introduce composite concepts as separate conceptual and notational elements in a modelling language. Composite concepts are compositions of existing concepts. To facilitate the introduction of composite concepts, the notion of stereotype is extended. This extension defines how a composite concept can be specified and added to a language's metamodel, without modifying the existing metamodel. From the definition of the stereotype, rules can be derived for transforming a language element that represents a composite concept into a composition of lan...
free text keywords: METIS-224387, IR-63473, SCS-Services, EWI-7079, Profiling (computer programming), Software development, business.industry, business, Artificial intelligence, Programming language, computer.software_genre, computer, Object Constraint Language, computer.programming_language, Theoretical computer science, Unified Modeling Language, Natural language processing, Metamodeling, Computer science, Composite number
Digital Humanities and Cultural Heritage
Download fromView all 2 versions
Universiteit Twente Repository
Conference object . 2005
Provider: NARCIS
Part of book or chapter of book
Provider: UnpayWall
Part of book or chapter of book
Provider: Crossref
16 references, page 1 of 2

1. Atkinson, C. and Kühne, T. Strict Profiles: Why and How. In Proceedings of <<UML>> 2000, York, UK, October 2000, pp. 309-322. [OpenAIRE]

2. Atkinson, C., et al. To Meta or Not to Meta - That is the Question. In Journal of Object Oriented Programming, Vol. 13, No. 8, December 2000, pp. 32-35.

3. Atkinsion, C. et al. Stereotypical Encounters of the Third Kind. In Proceedings of <<UML>> 2002, Dresden, Germany, September 2002, pp. 100-114.

4. Berner, S., et al. A Classification of Stereotypes for Object-Oriented Modeling Languages. In Proceedings of <<UML>> '99, Fort Collins, CO, USA, October 1999, pp. 249-264.

5. Dijkman, R.M., et al. An Approach to Relate Viewpoints and Modeling Languages. In Proceedings of the 7th IEEE Enterprise Distributed Object Computing (EDOC) Conference, Brisbane, Australia, pp. 14-27, 2003. [OpenAIRE]

6. Evans, A., et al. A unified superstructure for UML. In Journal of Object Technology, Vol. 4, No. 1, January-February 2005, pp. 165-181.

7. ISDL.

8. Jiang, Y., et al. On the Classification of UML's Meta Model Extension Mechanism. In Proceedings of <<UML>> 2004, Lisbon, Portugal, October 2004, pp. 54-68.

9. Patrascoiu, O. YATL: Yet Another Transformation Language. In Proceedings of the 1st European MDA Workshop, MDA-IA, pages 83-90. University of Twente, the Netherlands, January 2004. [OpenAIRE]

10.OMG. UML 2.0 Infrastructure Specification. OMG Adopted Specification ptc/03-09-12.

11.OMG. UML 2.0 OCL Specification. OMG Adopted Specification ptc/03-10-14.

12.Quartel, D., et al. Methodological support for service-oriented design with ISDL. In Proc. of the 2nd Int. Conf. on Service Oriented Computing, New York City, NY, USA, 2004. [OpenAIRE]

13.Quartel, D. et al. On architectural support for behavior refinement in distributed systems design. Journal of Integrated Design and Process Science, 6(1), March 2002. [OpenAIRE]

14.Quartel, D. et al. On the role of basic design concepts in behaviour structuring. In Computer Networks and ISDN Systems, No. 29, 1997, pp. 413-436. [OpenAIRE]

15.Schleicher, A. and Westfechtel, B. Beyond Stereotyping: Metamodeling Approaches for the UML. In: Proceedings of HICSS 34, 2001, pp. 3051-3060.

16 references, page 1 of 2
Powered by OpenAIRE Research Graph
Any information missing or wrong?Report an Issue