Martin Gogolla
ABSTRACT
This contribution discusses system modeling with UML behavior diagrams. We consider statecharts and both kinds of interaction diagrams, i.e., sequence and communication diagrams. We present new implementation features in a UML and OCL modeling tool: (1) Sequence diagram lifelines are extended with states from statecharts, and (2) communication diagrams are introduced as an alternative to sequence diagrams. We assess the introduced features and propose a systematic set of features which should be available in both kinds of interaction diagrams. We emphasize the role that OCL can play for such a feature set.
- F. Büttner and M. Gogolla. Modular Embedding of the Object Constraint Language into a Programming Language. In A. Simao and C. Morgan, editors, Proc. 14th Brazilian Symposium on Formal Methods (SBMF'2011), pages 124--139. Springer, Berlin, LNCS 7021, 2011. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- D. Calegari, M. V. Cengarle, and N. Szasz. UML 2.0 Interactions with OCL/RT Constraints. In FDL, pages 167--172. IEEE, 2008.Google Scholar
- H. Y. Chen, C. Li, and T. H. Tse. Transformation of UML Interaction Diagrams into Contract Specifications for Object-oriented Testing. In IEEE {7}, pages 1298--1303.Google Scholar
- M. M. J. Chonoles. Issue 15123: Sequence Diagram and Communication Diagrams should Support Instances as Lifelines (uml2-rtf), Mar. 2010. http://www.omg.org/issues/uml2-rtf.html#Issue15123.Google Scholar
- M. Gogolla, F. Büttner, and M. Richters. USE: A UML-Based Specification Environment for Validating UML and OCL. Science of Computer Programming, 69:27--34, 2007. Google ScholarDigital Library
- L. Hamann, O. Hofrichter, and M. Gogolla. Towards Integrated Structure and Behavior Modeling with OCL. In R. France, J. Kazmeier, R. Breu, and C. Atkinson, editors, Proc. 15th Int. Conf. Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems (MoDELS'2012), pages 235--251. Springer, Berlin, LNCS 7590, 2012. Google ScholarDigital Library
- IEEE, editor. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, Montréal, Canada, 7-10 October 2007. IEEE, 2007.Google Scholar
- A. Knapp and J. Wuttke. Model Checking of UML 2.0 Interactions. In T. Kühne, editor, MoDELS Workshops, volume 4364 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 42--51. Springer, 2006. Google ScholarDigital Library
- P. D. L. Machado, J. C. A. de Figueiredo, E. F. A. Lima, A. E. V. Barbosa, and H. S. Lima. Component-based Integration Testing from UML Interaction Diagrams. In IEEE {7}, pages 2679--2686.Google Scholar
- A. T. McNeile and N. Simons. Protocol Modelling: A Modelling Approach that Supports Reusable Behavioural Abstractions. Software and System Modeling, 5(1):91--107, 2006.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Z. Micskei and H. Waeselynck. The Many Meanings of UML2 Sequence Diagrams: A Survey. Software & Systems Modeling, 10(4):489--514, 2011. Google ScholarDigital Library
- F. Mostefaoui and J. Vachon. Design-Level Detection of Interactions in Aspect-UML Models Using Alloy. Journal of Object Technology, 6(7):137--165, 2007.Google ScholarCross Ref
- A. Nayak and D. Samanta. Model-based Test Cases Synthesis using UML Interaction Diagrams. ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes, 34(2):1--10, 2009. Google ScholarDigital Library
- OMG, editor. UML Superstructure 2.4.1. Object Management Group (OMG), Aug. 2011.Google Scholar
- OMG, editor. Object Constraint Language, Version 2.3.1. OMG, 2012. OMG Document, www.omg.org.Google Scholar
- J. Rumbaugh, I. Jacobson, and G. Booch. The Unified Modeling Language 2.0 Reference Manual. Addison-Wesley, Reading, 2003.Google Scholar
- J. Warmer and A. Kleppe. The Object Constraint Language: Precise Modeling with UML. Addison-Wesley, 2003. 2nd Edition. Google ScholarDigital Library
- M.-F. Wendland, M. Schneider, and Ø. Haugen. Evolution of the UML Interactions Metamodel. In A. Moreira, B. Schätz, J. Gray, A. Vallecillo, and P. J. Clarke, editors, MoDELS, volume 8107 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 405--421. Springer, 2013.Google Scholar
- P. Ziemann and M. Gogolla. OCL Extended with Temporal Logic. In M. Broy and A. Zamulin, editors, 5th Int. Conf. Perspectives of System Informatics (PSI'2003), pages 351--357. Springer, Berlin, LNCS 2890, 2003.Google Scholar
Index Terms
- Behavior Modeling with Interaction Diagrams in a UML and OCL Tool
Recommendations
Modeling Behavior with Interaction Diagrams in a UML and OCL Tool
Revised Selected Papers of the International Workshops on Behavior Modeling -- Foundations and Applications - Volume 6368This paper discusses system modeling with UML behavior diagrams. We consider statecharts and both kinds of interaction diagrams, i.e., sequence and communication diagrams. We present new implementation features in a UML and OCL modeling tool: 1ï ...
A New Approach for Generating LOTOS Specifications from UML Dynamic Models
C3S2E '15: Proceedings of the Eighth International C* Conference on Computer Science & Software EngineeringThe use of UML Statechart and Communication diagrams for modeling dynamic behaviors of systems is very widespread. UML diagrams support developers by means of visual conceptual illustrations. However, the lacks of firm semantics for these diagrams make ...
On integrating structure and behavior modeling with OCL
MODELS'12: Proceedings of the 15th international conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and SystemsPrecise modeling with UML and OCL traditionally focuses on structural model features like class invariants. OCL also allows the developer to handle behavioral aspects in form of operation pre- and postconditions. However, behavioral UML models like ...
Comments