Why Unified is not Universal? UML Shortcomings for Coping with Round-trip Engineering
Why Unified is not Universal? UML Shortcomings for Coping with Round-trip Engineering
复制标题
为什么统一不是通用的？
DOI：
10.1007/3-540-46852-8_44
复制
发表时间：
1999
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
S. Tichelaar
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
S. Demeyer;Stéphane Ducasse;S. Tichelaar
UML目前被认为是面向对象建模语言的“标准”，OMG最近在元对象工具（Meta Object Facility， MOF）上的工作就是最值得注意的例子。我们欢迎这些标准化的努力，但是对使用UML作为所有交换标准的灵丹妙药的倾向提出警告。特别是，我们认为UML不足以作为集成往返工程工具的工具互操作性标准，因为人们被迫依赖UML的内置扩展机制来充分地在源代码中对现实建模。因此，我们提出了一个可选的元模型（名为FAMIX），它作为FAMOOS项目中的工具互操作性标准，并且包含了许多建设性的建议，我们希望这些建议将影响UML和MOF标准的未来版本。
UML is currently embraced as “the” standard in object-oriented modeling languages, the recent work of OMG on the Meta Object Facility (MOF) being the most noteworthy example. We welcome these standardisation efforts, yet warn against the tendency to use UML as the panacea for all exchange standards. In particular, we argue that UML is not sufficient to serve as a tool-interoperability standard for integrating round-trip engineering tools, because one is forced to rely on UML’s built-in extension mechanisms to adequately model the reality in source-code. Consequently, we propose an alternative meta-model (named FAMIX), which serves as the tool interoperability standard within the FAMOOS project and which includes a number of constructive suggestions that we hope will influence future releases of the UML and MOF standards.