Skip to main content
Log in

Precise visual modeling: A case-study

  • Regular Paper
  • Published:
Software & Systems Modeling Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We develop an abstract model for our case-study: software to support a “video rental service.” This illustrates how a visual formalism, constraint diagrams, may be used in order to specify such systems precisely.

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.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Abrial J-R (1996) The B Book – Assigning programs to meanings. Cambridge University Press

  2. Euler L (1761) Lettres à une princesse d’Allemagne sur divers sujets de physique et de philosophie. 2:102–108 l’Academie Impériale des Sciences: St. Petersburg

  3. Fish A, Flower J, Howse J (2003) A reading algorithm for constraint diagrams. In: Proc. Symp. on Human Centric Computing, Languages & Environments. IEEE, pp 161–168

  4. Flower J, Howse J (2002) Generating Euler diagrams. In: Proc. Diagrams 2002, LNCS, vol 2317, pp 61–75

  5. Gil J, Kent S (1998) Three dimensional software modeling. In: Proc. ICSE 98, IEEE, pp 105–114

  6. Gil J, Howse J, Kent S (2001) Towards a formalization of constraint diagrams. In: Proc. Symp. on Human Centric Computing. IEEE, pp 72–79

  7. Hammer E (1995) Logic and Visual Information. CSLI Publications

  8. Howse J, Molina F, Taylor J (2000) On the completeness and expressiveness of spider diagram systems. In: Proc. Diagrams 2000, LNCS, vol 1889, pp 26–41

  9. Howse J, Molina F, Taylor J, Kent S, Gil J (2001) Spider Diagrams: A diagrammatic reasoning system. JVLC 12:299–324

    Google Scholar 

  10. Kent S (1997) Constraint diagrams: Visualising invariants in object oriented models. In: Proc. OOPSLA97. ACM SIGPLAN Notices 32(10):327–341

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Morgan C, Vickers T (eds) (1992) On the Refinement Calculus. Springer-Verlag

  12. Pitt D, Byers P (1994) The rest stays unchanged (concurrency and state-based specification). Formal Aspects of Computing 6:471–494

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. OMG (2003) UML Specification, Version 1.5, available from www.omg.org

  14. Schuman SA, Pitt DH (1987) Object-oriented subsystem specification. In: Meertens LGLT (ed) Program Specification and Transformation. Proc. IFIP Working Conference, North-Holland, pp 313–341

  15. Schuman SA, Pitt DH, Byers PJ (1990) Object-oriented process specification. In: Rattray (ed) Specification and Verification of Concurrent Systems. Proc. BCS FACS Workshop, Springer-Verlag, pp 21–70

  16. Shin S-J (1994) The Logical Status of Diagrams. Cambridge University Press

  17. Spivey JM (1988) Understanding Z: A Formal Language and its Formal Semantics. Cambridge University Press

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  18. Spivey JM (1989) The Z Notation: A Reference Manual. Prentice Hall

    Google Scholar 

  19. Sommerville I, Sawyer P (1997) Requirements Engineering – A good practice guide. Wiley

  20. Stapleton G, Howse J, Taylor J (2003) A constraint diagram reasoning system. In: Proc. 9th Intl. Conf. on Distributed Multimedia Systems. Knowledge Systems Institute, pp 263–270

  21. Venn J (1880) On the diagrammatic and mechanical representation of propositions and reasonings. The London, Edinburgh and Dublin Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science 9:1–18

  22. Warmer J, Kleppe A (1998) The Object Constraint Language. Addison-Wesley

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to John Howse.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Howse, J., Schuman, S. Precise visual modeling: A case-study. Softw Syst Model 4, 310–325 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-004-0074-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-004-0074-x

Keywords

Navigation