Abstract
Constraint diagrams are a diagrammatic notation which may be used to express logical constraints. They were designed to complement the Unified Modeling Language in the development of software systems. They generalize Venn diagrams and Euler circles, and include facilities for quantification and navigation of relations. Due to the lack of a linear ordering of symbols inherent in a diagrammatic language which expresses logical statements, some constraint diagrams have more than one intuitive meaning. We generalize, from an example based approach, to suggest a default reading for constraint diagrams. This reading is usually unique, but may require a small number of simple user choices.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bottoni, P., Koch, M., Parisi-Preesicce, F., Taentzer, G.: A Visualisation of OCL using Collaborations. In: Gogolla, M., Kobryn, C. (eds.) UML 2001. LNCS, vol. 2185, p. 257. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)
Euler, L.: Lettres a Une Princesse d’Allemagne. Letters 2, 102–108 (1761)
Fish, A., Flower, J., Howse, J.: A Reading Algorithm for Constraint Diagrams. To appear in Proceedings of HCC 2003, pp. 161–168 (2003)
Fish, A., Howse, J.: Computing Reading Trees for Constraint Diagrams. In: Pfaltz, J.L., Nagl, M., Böhlen, B. (eds.) AGTIVE 2003. LNCS, vol. 3062, pp. 260–274. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)
Flower, J., Howse, J.: Generating Euler Diagrams. In: Hegarty, M., Meyer, B., Narayanan, N.H. (eds.) Diagrams 2002. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2317, pp. 61–75. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)
Hammer, H.: Logic and Visual Information. CSLI Publications, Stanford (1995)
Howse, J., Molina, F., Taylor, J.: On the completeness and expressiveness of spider diagram systems. In: Anderson, M., Cheng, P., Haarslev, V. (eds.) Diagrams 2000. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1889, pp. 26–41. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)
Howse, J., Molina, F., Taylor, J., Kent, S., Gil, J.: Spider Diagrams: A Diagrammatic Reasoning System. JVLC 12, 299–324 (2001)
Howse, J., Schuman, S.: Precise Visual Modelling: a case study. Submited to SoSyM Journal, Springer-Verlag (2003)
Kent, S.: Constraint diagrams: Visualising invariants in object oriented models. In: Proceedings of OOPSLA 1997. ACM SIGPLAN Notices, vol. 32(10), pp. 327–341 (1997)
Kent Modelling Framework (KMF), Available at http://www.cs.ukc.ac.uk/kmf
OMG: UML Specification, Version 1.4, Available from http://www.omg.org
Shin, S.-J.: The Logical Status of Diagrams. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1994)
Swoboda, N.: Implementing Euler/Venn reasoning systems. In: Anderson, M., Meyer, B., Oliver, P. (eds.) Diagrammatic Representation and Reasoning, pp. 371–386. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)
Venn, J.: On the diagrammatic and mechanical representation of propositions and reasonings. The London, Edinburgh and Dublin Philosophical Magazine 9, 1–18 (1880)
Warmer, J.B., Kleppe, A.G.: The Object Constraint Language. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1998)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2004 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Fish, A., Howse, J. (2004). Towards a Default Reading for Constraint Diagrams. In: Blackwell, A.F., Marriott, K., Shimojima, A. (eds) Diagrammatic Representation and Inference. Diagrams 2004. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 2980. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-25931-2_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-25931-2_8
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-21268-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-25931-2
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive