GMF: A Model Migration Case for the Transformation Tool Contest

Using a real-life evolution taken from the Graphical Modeling Framework, we invite submissions to explore ways in which model transformation and migration tools can be used to migrate models in response to metamodel adaptation.Comment: In Proceedings TTC 2011, arXiv:1111.440

Using a foundational ontology to investigate the semantics behind the concepts of the i* language

In the past few years, the community that develops i* has become aware of the problem of having so many variants, since it makes it difficult for newcomers to learn how to use the language and even to experts to efficiently exchange knowledge and disseminate their proposals. Moreover, this problem also delays the transfer of the i* framework to industrial settings. Our work is one of the current attempts to promote interoperability among the existing variants, and it does that by investigating the semantics behind the i* core concepts. For that, we apply a foundational ontology named UFO, which is used as a semantically coherent reference model to which the language should be isomorphic. In this paper, we report on the steps we have pursued, what we have accomplished so far, also setting the context for the work ahead

Using a foundational ontology to investigate the semantics behind the concepts of the i* language

In the past few years, the community that develops i* has become aware of the problem of having so many variants, since it makes it difficult for newcomers to learn how to use the language and even to experts to efficiently exchange knowledge and disseminate their proposals. Moreover, this problem also delays the transfer of the i* framework to industrial settings. Our work is one of the current attempts to promote interoperability among the existing variants, and it does that by investigating the semantics behind the i* core concepts. For that, we apply a foundational ontology named UFO, which is used as a semantically coherent reference model to which the language should be isomorphic. In this paper, we report on the steps we have pursued, what we have accomplished so far, also setting the context for the work ahead.Peer ReviewedPostprint (author’s final draft

iStarML: principles and implications

iStarML is an XML-based format for enabling i* interoperability. A relevant difference with any other interoperability proposal is that iStarML is founded under the assumption that there is not a common ontology guiding this communication proposal. The different i* variants and even particular applications proposing new language constructors forced to confront a theoretical approach for supporting an interoperability approach in an evolving and variable semantic scenario. In this paper we focused on the theories behind the iStarML proposal, which include sociological, cybernetics and linguistics approaches. Finally, we apply what these theories predict to the case of the i* framework and its research community.Peer ReviewedPostprint (published version

Model interchange and tool interoperability in the i* framework: a proof of concept

Peer ReviewedPostprint (published version

A Comparison of Model Migration Tools

International audienceModelling languages and thus their metamodels are subject to change. When a metamodel evolves, existing models may no longer conform to the evolved metamodel. To avoid rebuilding them from scratch, existing models must be migrated to conform to the evolved metamodel. Manually migrating existing models is tedious and errorprone. To alleviate this, several tools have been proposed to build a migration strategy that automates the migration of existing models. Little is known about the advantages and disadvantages of the tools in different situations. In this paper, we thus compare a representative sample of migration tools - AML, COPE, Ecore2Ecore and Epsilon Flock - using common migration examples. The criteria used in the comparison aim to support users in selecting the most appropriate tool for their situation

A metamodelling approach for i* model translations

The i* (i-star) framework has been widely adopted by the information systems community. Since the time it was proposed, different variations have arisen. Some of them just propose slight changes in the language definition, whilst others introduce constructs for particular usages. This flexibility is one of the reasons that makes i* attractive, but it has as counterpart the impossibility of automatically porting i* models from one context of use to another. This lack of interoperability makes difficult to build a repository of models, to adopt directly techniques defined for one variation, or to use i* tools in a feature-oriented instead of a variant-oriented way. In this paper, we explore in more detail the interoperability problem from a metamodel perspective. We analyse the state of the art concerning variations of the i* language, from these variations and following a proposal from Wachsmuth, we define a supermetamodel hosting identified variations, general enough so as to embrace others yet to exist. We present a translation algorithm oriented to semantic preservation and we use the XML-based iStarML interchange format to illustrate the interconnection of two tools.Peer ReviewedPostprint (author's final draft

A Tool for Supporting the Co-Evolution of Enterprise Architecture Meta-models and Models

Enterprise architecture models capture the concepts and relationships that together describe the essentials of the various enterprise domains. This model of the enterprise is tightly coupled to a domain-specific modeling language that defines the formalisms for creating and updating such model. These languages are described as meta-models by the model-driven engineering field. Results from surveys on enterprise architecture tool analysis showed a lack of support concerning the co-evolution of enterprise architecture meta-model and models. This paper presents a tool that automates enterprise architecture models co-evolution according to a set of meta-model changes. A Portuguese governmental organization used and validated the tool using observational, analytical and descriptive evaluation methods