On the Key Role of Composition in Object-Oriented Modelling

Steimann, Friedrich; Gößner, Jens; Mück, Thomas A.

doi:10.1007/978-3-540-45221-8_11

Cited by 7 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Composition relationship is a form of abstraction in the form of a relation between the whole and its parts. There are several influential works that consider composition in the context of design methods (Motschnig-Pitrik and Kaasbøll, 1999a;Kilov, 1999;Steimann et al, 2003;Gerstla and Pribbenow, 1996;Barbier et al, 2003). The diversity of the properties of composition that we can see in the above mentioned works can be explained by different backgrounds of authors aiming to define the primary properties of composition.…”

Section: Systems Theory Of Cbdmsmentioning

confidence: 96%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Systemic classification of concern-based design methods in the context of enterprise architecture

Balabko

Wegmann

2006

Inf Syst Front

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Enterprise Architecture (EA) is a relatively new domain that is rapidly developing. "The primary reason for developing EA is to support business by providing the fundamental technology and process structure for an IT strategy" [TOGAF]. EA models have to model enterprises facets that span from marketing to IT. As a result, EA models tend to become large. Large EA models create a problem for model management. Concern-based design methods (CBDMs) aim to solve this problem by considering EA models as a composition of smaller, manageable parts-concerns. There are dozens of different CBDMs that can be used in the context of EA: from very generic methods to specific methods for business modeling or IT implementations. This variety of methods can cause two problems for those who develop and use innovative CBDMs in the field of Enterprise Architecture (EA). The first problem is to choose specific CBDMs that can be used in a given EA methodology: this is a problem for researchers who develop their own EA methodology. The second problem is to find similar methods (with the same problem domain or with similar frameworks) in order to make a comparative analysis with these methods: this is a problem of researchers who develop their own CBDMs related to a specific problem domain in EA (such as business process modeling or aspect oriented programming). We aim to address both of these problems by means about trends that we have observed in the field of concernbased design and modeling.

show abstract

Section: Systems Theory Of Cbdmsmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…Steimann et al (2003) considers three main forms of abstraction: composition, classification and generalization. However, in our work we consider classification as the result of generalization: instances become classified based on defined types and subtypes.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Systemic classification of concern-based design methods in the context of enterprise architecture

Balabko

Wegmann

2006

Inf Syst Front

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As indicated by our use of the term component, we interpret the underlying abstraction principle as that of composition; in fact, we assume that there is some (abstract; cf. [40]) class that represents the system, whose instances are composites made up of others. Thus, should there be a class symbol in some other diagram that has the same name as the system, we interpret this as a sign of co-reference, i.e., that class and system are the same entity, offering the same functions.…”

Section: Use Case Diagramsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploiting practical limitations of UML diagrams for model validation and execution

Steimann¹,

Vollmer

2005

Softw Syst Model

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We suggest a framework for UML diagram validation and execution that takes advantage of some of the practical restrictions induced by diagrammatic representations (as compared to Turing equivalent programming languages) by exploiting possible gains in decidability. In particular, within our framework we can prove that an object interaction comes to an end, or that one action is always performed before another. Even more appealingly, we can compute efficiently whether two models are equivalent (aiding in the redesign or refactoring of a model), and what the differences between two models are. The framework employs a simple modelling object language (called MOL) for which we present formal syntax and semantics. A first generation of tools has been implemented that allows us to collect experience with our approach, guiding its further development.

show abstract

“…Thus, association relationships are identified more implicitly than explicitly. Furthermore, the distinction between aggregation and association is often a matter of state rather than a difference on semantics [9].…”

Section: Semantic Relations In Software Engineeringmentioning

confidence: 99%

Semantic Relation Modeling and Representation for Problem-Solving Ontology-based Linguistic Resources: Issues and Proposals

Álvarez¹,

Vaquero²,

Sáenz³

et al. 2007

Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Natural Language Processing and Cognitive Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Semantic relations are an important element in the construction of ontologies and models of problem domains. Nevertheless, they remain underspecified. This is a pervasive problem in Software Engineering and Artificial Intelligence. Consequently, we find semantic links that can have multiple interpretations in ontologies that support information systems, semantic data models with abstractions that are not enough to capture the relation richness of problem domains, and improperly structured taxonomies. However, if provided with precise semantics, some of these problems can be avoided, and meaningful operations can be performed on them. In this paper we present some insightful issues about the modeling and representation of semantic relations that include the available taxonomy structuring methodologies as well as the initiatives aiming to provide relations with precise semantics. Furthermore, we explain and propose the notion of control and verification of relations as a means to properly structure ontologies.

show abstract

On the Key Role of Composition in Object-Oriented Modelling

Cited by 7 publications

References 7 publications

Systemic classification of concern-based design methods in the context of enterprise architecture

Systemic classification of concern-based design methods in the context of enterprise architecture

Exploiting practical limitations of UML diagrams for model validation and execution

Semantic Relation Modeling and Representation for Problem-Solving Ontology-based Linguistic Resources: Issues and Proposals

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About