A graphical specification of model transformations with triple graph grammars

Models and model transformations are the core concepts of OMG's MDA (TM) approach. Within this approach, most models are derived from the MOF and have a graph-based nature. In contrast, most of the current model transformations are specified textually. To enable a graphical specification of model transformation rules, this paper proposes to use triple graph grammars as declarative specification formalism. These triple graph grammars can be specified within the FUJABA tool and we argue that these rules can be more easily specified and they become more understandable and maintainable. To show the practicability of our approach, we present how to generate Tefkat rules from triple graph grammar rules, which helps to integrate triple graph grammars with a state of a art model transformation tool and shows the expressiveness of the concept.

A study of the evolution of the representational capabilities of process modeling grammars

A plethora of process modeling techniques has been proposed over the years. One way of evaluating and comparing the scope and completeness of techniques is by way of representational analysis. The purpose of this paper is to examine how process modeling techniques have developed over the last four decades. The basis of the comparison is the Bunge-Wand-Weber representation model, a benchmark used for the analysis of grammars that purport to model the real world and the interactions within it. This paper presents a comparison of representational analyses of several popular process modeling techniques and has two main outcomes. First, it provides insights, within the boundaries of a representational analysis, into the extent to which process modeling techniques have developed over time. Second, the findings also indicate areas in which the underlying theory seems to be over-engineered or lacking in specialization.

Representing part-whole relationships in conceptual modeling: An empirical evaluation

The part-of or part-whole construct is a fundamental element of many conceptual modeling grammars that is used to associate one thing (a component) with another thing (a composite). Substantive theoretical issues surrounding the part-whole construct remain to be resolved, however. For instance, contrary to widespread claims, the relationship between components and composites is not always transitive. Moreover, how the partwhole construct should be represented in a conceptual schema diagram remains a contentious issue. Some analysts argue composites should be represented as a relationship or association. Others argue they should be represented as an entity. In this paper we use an ontological theory to support our arguments that composites should be represented as entities and not relationships or associations. We also describe an experiment that we undertook to test whether representing composites as relationships or entities enables users to understand a domain better. Our results support our arguments that using entities to represent composites enables users to better understand a domain.