skip to main content
10.1145/1141277.1141569acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagessacConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article

Describing dynamic software architectures using an extended UML model

Published:23 April 2006Publication History

ABSTRACT

In this paper, we propose a new UML2.0 profile to describe the change of software architectures. The profile introduces a set of stereotypes for modeling the structural and the dynamic aspect as well as architectural constraints. We adapt the component diagrams metamodel on specific purposes by extending existing metaclasses. The adaptations are defined using stereotypes which are grouped in a profile. The profile offers to the architects an intuitive and complete way to specify the software architecture based on visual notations.

References

  1. OMG: UML 2.0 superstructure specification, final adopted specification. Omg document,Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Selonen, P., Xu, J.: Validating UML models against architectural profiles. SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes 28 (2003) 58--67 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Hadj Kacem, M., Jmaiel, M., Hadj Kacem, A., Drira, K.: Evaluation and comparison of ADL based approaches for the description of dynamic of software architectures. In: ICEIS'05: Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems, Miami, USA, INSTICC Press (2005) 189--195Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Medvidovic, N., Taylor, R.: A classification and comparison framework for software architecture description languages. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 26 (2000) 70--93 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Bradbury, J. S., Cordy, J. R., Dingel, J., Wermelinger, M.: A survey of self management in dynamic software architecture specifications. In: WOSS'04: The ACM SIGSOFT International Workshop on Self-Managed Systems, ACM Press (2004) Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Roh, S., Kim, K., Jeon, T.: Architecture modeling language based on UML2.0. In: APSEC, The 11th Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference, IEEE Computer Society (2004) 663--669 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Pérez-Martinez, J. E., Sierra-Alonso, A.: UML1.4 versus UML2.0 as languages to describe software architectures. In: EWSA'04, Software Architecture, First European Workshop, EWSA 2004. Volume 3047 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science., Springer (2004) 88--102Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Medvidovic, N., Rosenblum, D., R. Taylor: A language and environment for architecture-based software development and evolution. In: Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE'99). (1999) 44--53 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Pérez-Martinez, J. E.: Heavyweight extensions to the UML metamodel to describe the C3 architectural style. SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes 28 (2003) 5--5 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Medvidovic, N., Rosenblum, D. S., Redmiles, D. F., Robbins, J. E.: Modeling software architectures in the unified modeling language. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology 11 (2002) 2--57 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Loulou, I., Hadj Kacem, A., Jmaiel, M., Drira, K.: Towards a unified graph-based framework for dynamic component-based architectures description in Z. In: ICPS'04: The IEEE/ACS International Conference on Pervasive Services, IEEE Computer Society (2004) 227--234 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Kandé, M. M., Strohmeier, A.: Towards a UML profile for software architecture descriptions. In: UML 2000 - The Unified Modeling Language. Advancing the Standard. 3th International Conference, York, UK. Volume 1939 of LNCS., Springer (2000) 513--527 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Heckel, R., Cherchago, A., Lohmann, M.: A formal approach to service specification and matching based on graph transformation. Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science 105 (2004) 37--49 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. LeMétayer, D.: Describing software architecture styles using graph grammars. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 24 (1998) 521--533 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. OMG: The unified modelling language 2.0 - object constraint language 2.0 proposal. OMG document,Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Describing dynamic software architectures using an extended UML model

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Conferences
          SAC '06: Proceedings of the 2006 ACM symposium on Applied computing
          April 2006
          1967 pages
          ISBN:1595931082
          DOI:10.1145/1141277

          Copyright © 2006 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 23 April 2006

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • Article

          Acceptance Rates

          Overall Acceptance Rate1,650of6,669submissions,25%

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader