Skip to main content
Log in

Model-Driven Development

Informatik-Spektrum Aims and scope

Abstract

The model-driven architecture (MDA) paradigm is well-known and widely used in the field of model-based software development. However, there are still some issues that are problematic and that need to be dealt with carefully. In this paper we present a metaphor that explains how MDA grows in complexity as problems faced become more difficult or “wicked”, and how a method designed to be powerful, flexible and MDA-compliant can eventually become, in effect, a “jigsaw puzzle”. This jigsaw puzzle is not merely the result of having a collection of methodological “pieces” with routes across them, but also arises as a result of the criteria underlying the MDA abstraction layers. We compare MDA to other research fields such as human-computer interaction, model management and method engineering, and we use as an example the OO-Method, a software development method based on MDA-compliant model transformations. We focus on a methodological piece that is conceived to allow the specification of interaction requirements by means of interface sketches. These sketches are supported by a task model that serves as a sound basis for formalisation and allows the application of model transformation in order to obtain subsequent models. A case study illustrates the requirements capture method together with the software development process defined by the OO-Method. The whole process presented in the case study represents one of the possible routes that can be followed when developing a software system with the OO-Method.

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

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ågerfalk PJ, Fitzgerald B (2006) Exploring the concept of method rationale: A conceptual tool for method tailoring. In: Siau K (ed) Advanced Topics in Database Research, vol 5. Idea Group, Hershey, PA

    Google Scholar 

  2. Ågerfalk PJ, Ralyté J (2006) Situational requirements engineering processes: reflecting on method engineering and requirements practice. Software process: improvement and practice. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bailey BP, Konstan JA (2003) Are Informal Tools Better? Comparing DEMAIS, Pencil and Paper, and Authorware for Early Multimedia Design. Human Factors in Computing Systems CHI’2003. ACM, New York

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bernstein PA (2003) Applying Model Management to Classical Meta Data Problems. In: Proceedings of Conference on Innovative Data Systems Research (CIDR) 2003

  5. Brinkkemper S (1996) Method engineering: engineering of information systems development methods and tools. Inf Softw Technol 38:275–280

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Brinkkemper S, Saeki M, Harmsen F (1999) Metamodelling based assembly techniques for situational method engineering. Inf Syst 24(3):209–228, doi: 10.1016/S0306-4379(99)00016-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Caetano A, Goulart N, Fonseca M, Jorge J (2002) JavaSketchIt: Issues in Sketching the Look of User Interfaces. AAAI Spring Symposium. Sketch understanding. AAAI Press, Menlo Park, CA, pp 9–14

    Google Scholar 

  8. Care Technologies (2007) http://www.care-t.com. Accessed July 2007

  9. Coyette A, Vanderdonckt J (2005) A Sketching Tool for Designing Anyuser, Anyplatform, Anywhere User Interfaces. INTERACT 2005, LNCS 3585. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 550–564

    Google Scholar 

  10. DeLaVara JL, Sánchez J (2007) Business process-driven requirements engineering: a goal-based approach. In: 8th Workshop on Business Process Modeling, Development, and Support (BPMDS’07), CAiSE’07, Trondheim, Norway (in press)

  11. Díaz I, Losavio F, Matteo A, Pastor O (2003) A Specification Pattern for Use Cases. Inf Manage J (Elsevier Science B.V.) 41:961–975

    Google Scholar 

  12. España S, Pederiva I, Panach JI (2007) Integrating Model-Based and Task-Based Approaches to User Interface Generation. In: Calvary, Pribeanu C, Santucci G, Vanderdonckt J (eds) Computer-Aided Design of User Interfaces VI. Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp 255–263

    Google Scholar 

  13. Fitzgerald G (1991) Validating new information systems techniques: a retrospective analysis. In: Nissen HE, Klein HK, Hirschheim R (eds) Information Systems Research: Contemporary Approaches and Emergent Traditions. Elsevier Science, Oxford, pp 657–672

    Google Scholar 

  14. Fons J, Valderas P, Albert M, Pastor O (2003) Development of Web Applications from Web Enhanced Conceptual Schemas. ER 2003, LNCS. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 232–245

    Google Scholar 

  15. Gupta D, Prakash N (2001) Engineering methods from method requirements specifications. Requirements Engineering 6(3):135–160, doi: 10.1007/s007660170001

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. ISO/IEC 9126-1 (2001) Software engineering. Product quality 1: Quality model

  17. Karlsson F, Ågerfalk PJ (2004) Method configuration: Adapting to situational characteristics while creating reusable assets. Inf Softw Technol 46(9):619–633, doi: 10.1016/j.infsof.2003.12.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Karlsson F, Wistrand K (2006) Combining method engineering with activity theory: Theoretical grounding of the method component concept. Eur J Inf Syst 15(1):82–90, doi: 10.1057/palgrave.ejis.3000596

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Landay J, Myers BA (2001) Sketching Interfaces: Toward More Human Interface Design. IEEE Comput 34:56–64

    Google Scholar 

  20. Lyytinen K, Welke R (1999) Guest editorial: Special issue on meta-modelling and methodology engineering. Inf Syst 24(2):67–69, doi: 10.1016/S0306-4379(99)00005-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. MDA (2007) http://www.omg.org/mda. Accessed July/June 2007/2008

  22. Mirbel I, Ralyté J (2006) Situational method engineering: Combining assembly-based and roadmap-driven approaches. Requirements Eng 11(1):58–78, doi: 10.1007/s00766-005-0019-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Molina P (2003) User interface specification: from requirements to automatic generation. PhD Thesis, DSIC, Universidad Politécnica de Valencia (in Spanish)

  24. Morgan T (2002) Business Rules and Information Systems: Aligning IT with Business Goals. Addison-Wesley, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  25. Newman MW, Lin J, Hong JI, Landay JA (2003) DENIM: An Informal Web Site Design Tool Inspired by Observations of Practice. Human Comput Inter 18:259–324

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Pastor O, González A, España S (2007) Conceptual alignment of software production methods. In: Krogstie J, Opdahl A, Brinkkemper S (eds) Conceptual modelling in information systems engineering. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 209–228

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  27. Pastor Ó, Insfrán E, et al. (1997) OO-Method: An OO Software Production Environment Combining Conventional and Formal Methods. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. 9th Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering (CAiSE’97), Barcelona, Spain. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York

    Google Scholar 

  28. Paternò F, Mancini C, et al. (1997) ConcurTaskTrees: A Diagrammatic Notation for Specifying Task Models. In: Proceedings of the IFIP TC13 International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction. Chapman and Hall, London, pp 362–369

    Google Scholar 

  29. Pederiva I, Vanderdonckt J, España S, Panach JI, Pastor O (2007) The Beautification of Automatically Generated User Interfaces. In: Proceedings of XI IFIP TC13 International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (INTERACT 2007), LNCS 4662. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 209–422

    Google Scholar 

  30. Plimmer BE, Apperley M (2003) Software for Students to Sketch Interface Designs. In: Proceedings of Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (INTERACT 2003). IOS, Amsterdam, pp 73–80

    Google Scholar 

  31. Rittel H, Webber M (1973) Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sci 4:155–169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Schipper M, Joosten S (1996) A validation procedure for information systems modelling techniques. In: Workshop on Evaluation of Modeling Methods in Systems Analysis and Design, 8th Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering (CAISE’96). Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York

    Google Scholar 

  33. Vanderdonckt J, Limbourg Q, et al. (2004) USIXML: a User Interface Description Language for Specifying Multimodal User Interfaces. In: Proceedings of W3C Workshop on Multimodal Interaction (WMI’2004), Sophia Antipolis, Greece

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Oscar Pastor.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pastor, O., España, S., Panach, J. et al. Model-Driven Development. Informatik Spektrum 31, 394–407 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00287-008-0275-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00287-008-0275-8

Keywords

Navigation