Skip to main content

Strict Profiles: Why and How

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 1939))

Abstract

The definition of a clean profile mechanism will play a crucial role in the UML’s future in terms of how useful it will be to modellers and how well tool vendors may implement the new facilities. Unfortunately, in an attempt to restrict profile definitions to a single meta level, predefined modeling elements are currently specified exclusively at the meta-model level, and therefore can be applied solely through the mechanism of meta-instantiation. We identify the problems associated with such a restriction and explain why model level inheritance also has a role to play in the definition of predefined modeling elements. We point out the fundamental differences and relationships between the two mechanisms in the context of defining UML profiles and provide guidelines as to which mechanism should be used under which circumstance. We conclude by describing the necessity for the use of both mechanisms in the definition of UML profiles within a strict metamodeling framework.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • 1.Kobryn, C.: UML 2001: A Standardization Odyssey. Communications of the ACM (42):10 (1999) 29–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 2.D’Souza, D., Sane, A., Birchenough, A: First Class Extensibility for UML — Packaging of Profiles, Stereotypes, Patterns. In: UML’99 (1999) 265–277

    Google Scholar 

  • 3.Cook, S., Kleppe, A., Mitchel, R., Rumpe, B., Warmer, J. and Wills, A., C.: Defining UML Family Members Using Prefaces. In: Proceedings of TOOLS 32, IEEE (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  • 4.OMG: “White Paper on the profile mechanism”, OMG Document ad/99-04-07 (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  • 6. Atkinson, C.: Supporting and Applying the UML Conceptual Framework. In: UML’98 (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  • 7. Alhir, S., S.: Extending the Unified Modeling Language. At: http://home.earthlink.net/~salhir (1999)

  • 8. Gamma, E., Helm, R., Johnson, R., E., Vlissides, J.: Design Patterns: Elements of Reusable Object-Oriented Software. Addison-Wesley (1994

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2000 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Atkinson, C., Kühne, T. (2000). Strict Profiles: Why and How. In: Evans, A., Kent, S., Selic, B. (eds) ≪UML≫ 2000 — The Unified Modeling Language. UML 2000. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 1939. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-40011-7_22

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-40011-7_22

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-41133-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-40011-0

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics