Chapter 5. A Mathematical Semantics for Architectural Connectors

Fiadeiro, José Luiz; Lopes, Antónia; Wermelinger, Michel

doi:10.1007/978-3-540-45191-4_5

Cited by 31 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The semantics of both the composition and distribution logic, and of coordination and location laws, builds on recent work around CommUnity, a formal approach that we have been developing for architectural description [14]. CommUnity includes primitives that capture distribution and mobility aspects [19], and explicitly separate between components computation, coordination and distribution/mobility.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The semantics of our distribution logic builds on our recent work around CommUnity, a formal approach that we have been developing for architectural description [14]. CommUnity includes primitives that capture distribution and mobility aspects [4,19].…”

Section: Motivationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For instance, the event that triggers the withdrawal business activity instantiates as atm.withdraw(n) in the location interface and cust.withdraw(n,acco) in the coordination interface Assuming that the coordination law that is active in the run-time configuration is SW-CL (see section 3), the occurrence of the event is subject to the following rules: The joint execution of ECA rules that we have in mind, as formalised in [14], takes the conjunction of the guards and the parallel composition of the actions (i.e. the union of the corresponding synchronisation sets) when BT holds.…”

Section: Integration Of Concernsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Distribution concerns in service-oriented modelling

Aoumeur¹,

Fiadeiro²,

Oliveira³

2006

IJIPT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Service-oriented development offers a novel architectural approach that addresses crucial characteristics of modern business process development such as dynamic evolution, intra-and interenterprise cooperation, and distribution/mobility. In previous papers, we have shown how the mechanisms that regulate the relationships, functioning and cooperation of business activities in such architectural models can be externalised from business rules in terms of connectors that can be superposed dynamically on stable core business entities. That is to say, we focused on what, in the literature, has been called the "service composition layer" of service-oriented architectures or, for short, their "composition logic". Our emphasis in this paper is on the distribution aspects: we show how a corresponding "distribution logic" can be defined in terms of another set of architectural primitives that address the way business rules depend on "locations". These primitives address what are sometimes called "business channels" (ATMs, PDAs, Pay-TV, Internet, inter alia) as offered in typical contemporary ICT-infrastructures with substantial added-value to business processes. We argue that interacting (core) business entities located at or endowed with such ICT capabilities should be modelled in a way that separates the composition from the distribution logic so that business interactions can be understood and evolved in a location-transparent way. Our approach is based on a mathematical model that we have recently developed for modelling context-aware interactions. An example from banking is used for illustrating its applicability.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Motivationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Integration Of Concernsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Distribution concerns in service-oriented modelling

Aoumeur¹,

Fiadeiro²,

Oliveira³

2006

IJIPT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A categorical semantics of connectors is proposed in [9], where coordination is modelled through signature morphisms. There is a clear separation between computation, occurring in components, and coordination, performed by connectors.…”

Section: Exogenous Connectorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Software Component Model and Its Preliminary Formalisation

Lau

Ornaghi

Wang

2006

Formal Methods for Components and Objects

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. A software component model should define what components are, and how they can be composed. That is, it should define a theory of components and their composition. Current software component models tend to use objects or port-connector type architectural units as components, with method calls and port-to-port connections as composition mechanisms. However, these models do not provide a proper composition theory, in particular for key underlying concepts such as encapsulation and compositionality. In this paper, we outline our notion of these concepts, and give a preliminary formalisation of a software component model that embodies these concepts.

show abstract

“…a categorical framework supporting the separation between "computation" and "coordination" as architectural dimensions in software development [9]. This framework is based on what we have called "coordinated categories" [5] -concrete categories (faithful functors) that externalise the interfaces used by components to interact with other components.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Structured Co-spans: An Algebra of Interaction Protocols

Fiadeiro

Schmitt

2007

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Software is becoming an integral part of a range of products and services performing vital functions in all sectors of economic and social activity. In such softwareintensive systems, software applications are required to interact, in a seamless way, with other software components, devices, sensors, even humans. The complexity involved in building the software components that will be deployed in such systems in not so much on the "size" of their code but on the number and intricacy on the interactions in which they will be involved, what in [6] we have called social complexity.From an algebraic point of view, social complexity raises new challenges with respect to the more established physiological complexity, i.e. the fact that a complex whole can be understood as a composition of its parts. The basic difference is that it does not make sense to see software-intensive systems as being compositions, in an algebraic sense, of simpler components. There is not a notion of whole to which the parts contribute but, rather, a number of autonomous entities that interact with each other through external connectors. This is why it is so important to put the notion of interaction at the centre of research in software-intensive system modelling, and to support methods and languages that separate interaction concerns from computational ones. In the past, we developed Abstract. We extend the theory of (co-)spans as a means of providing an algebraic approach to complex interactions as they arise in software-intensive systems. In order to make interconnections independent of the nature of components involved, interaction protocols are formalised not in terms of morphisms (i.e. part-of relationships) but a generalised notion of (co-)span in which the arms are structured morphisms -the head (the glue of the protocol) and the hands (the interfaces of the protocol) belong to different categories, the category of glues being coordinated over that of the interfaces. The proposed generalization sheds some additional light into adjunctions in bicategories, namely on the factorisation of left adjoint 2-sided enrichments.

show abstract

Chapter 5. A Mathematical Semantics for Architectural Connectors

Cited by 31 publications

References 22 publications

Distribution concerns in service-oriented modelling

Distribution concerns in service-oriented modelling

A Software Component Model and Its Preliminary Formalisation

Structured Co-spans: An Algebra of Interaction Protocols

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About