The rationale of powertype-based metamodelling to underpin software development methodologies

Conferences in Research and Practice in Information Technology Series

Volumn 43, Issue , 2005, Pages 7-16

  Henderson Sellers, Brian ^a   Gonzalez Perez, Cesar ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY SYDNEY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Metamodelling; Powertype; Software development methodologies

Indexed keywords

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS; META-MODELLING; MODELLING LANGUAGE; OBJECT ORIENTED; POWERTYPE; SOFTWARE DEVELOPER; SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT METHODOLOGIES;

SOFTWARE DESIGN;

EID: 84863662948     PISSN: 14451336     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (26)

1. ANSI (1989): Information Resource Dictionary System, X3.138, American National Standards Institute.
2. Atkinson, C. (1998): Supporting and applying the UML conceptual framework. In «UML» 1998: Beyond the Notation, Vol. 1618. BÉZIVIN, J. and MULLER, P.-A. (eds). Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 21-36.
3. Atkinson, C. and Kühne, T. (2000a): Meta-level independent modelling. In International Workshop on Model Engineering at 14th European Conference on Object-Oriented Programming.
4. Atkinson, C. and Kühne, T. (2000b): Strict profiles: why and how. In «UML» 2000: Advancing the Standard, Vol. 1939. EVANS, A., KENT, S. and SELIC, B. (eds). Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 309-322.
5. Atkinson, C. and Kühne, T. (2001): The essence of multilevel metamodelling. In «UML» 2001: Modeling Languages, Concepts and Tools, Vol. 2185. GOGOLLA, M. and KOBRYN, C. (eds). Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 19-33.
6. Atkinson, C. and Kühne, T. (2002): Rearchitecting the UML infrastructure. ACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simulation, 12(4). 290-321
7. Atkinson, C. and Kühne, T. (2003): Model-driven development: a metamodeling foundation. IEEE Software, 20(5), 36-41.
8. Bandinelli, S., Fuggetta, A., Lavazza, L., Loi, M. and Picco, G. P. (1993): Modeling and Improving an Industrial Software Process. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 21(5): 440-453.
9. Dahchour, M. and Pirotte, A. (2002): Materialization and its metaclass implementation. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 14(5): 1078-1094.
10. Firesmith, D.G. and Henderson-Sellers, B. (2002): The OPEN Process Framework. London, Addison- Wesley
11. Gershenson, C. (2002): Complex philosophy. Procs. First Biennial Seminar on the Philosophical, Methodological & Epistemological Implications of Complexity Theory. La Habana, Cuba
12. González-Pérez, C.A. and Henderson-Sellers, B. (2005): Templates and resources in software development methodologies. Journal of Object Technology, [in press, May/June 2005 issue].
13. Graham, I. (1995): A non-procedural process model for object-oriented software development. Report on Object Analysis and Design, 1(5): 10-11.
14. Kleppe, A., Warmer, J. and Bast, W. (2003): MDA Explained: The Model Driven Architecture - Practice and Promise. Reading, MA, Addison- Wesley.
15. Martin, J. and Odell, J.J. (1992): Object-Oriented Analysis and Design. Englewood Cliffs, NJ., Prentice- Hall.
16. Martin, J. and Odell, J.J. (1995): Object-Oriented Methods: A Foundation. Englewood Cliffs, NJ., Prentice- Hall.
17. Odell, J.J. (1994): Power types. Journal of Object- Oriented Programming, 7(2): 8-12.
18. OMG (2002a): Meta Object Facility (MOF) Specification, formal/2002-04-03, Object Management Group.
19. OMG (2002b): Software Process Engineering Metamodel Specification, formal/2002-11-14, Object Management Group.
20. OMG (2003): Unified Modelling Language Specification, formal/03-03-01, Object Management Group.
21. Pirotte, A., Zimányi, E., Massart, D. and Yakusheva, T. (1994): Materialization: a powerful and ubiquitous abstraction pattern. In 20th International Conference on Very Large Data Bases. BOCCA, J., JARKE, M. and ZANIOLO, C. (eds). 630-641.
22. Podnar, I., Mikac, B. and Caric, A. (2000): SDL based approach to software process modeling. In EWSPT 2000. CONRADI, R. (ed). Berlin, Springer-Verlag.
23. Rolland, C., Prakash, N. and Benjamen, A. (1999): A multi-model view of process modelling. Requirements Engineering Journal, 4(4): 169-187.
24. SA (2004): Standard Metamodel for Software Development Methodologies, AS 4651-2004, Standards Australia.
25. Seidewitz, E. (2003): What models mean. IEEE Software, 20(5): 26-31.
26. Störrle, H. (2001): Describing process p atterns with UML. In Software Process Technology, Vol. LNCS 2077, Berlin, Springer-Verlag, 173-181.