skip to main content
article

A relationship-driven approach to view merging

Published: 01 November 2006 Publication History

Abstract

A key problem in view-based software development is merging a set of disparate views into a single seamless view. To merge a set of views, we need to know how they are related. In this extended abstract, we discuss the methodological aspects of describing the relationships between views. We argue that view relationships should be treated as first-class artifacts in the merge problem and propose a general approach to view merging based on this argument. We illustrate the usefulness of our approach by instantiating it to the state-machine modelling domain and developing a flexible tool for merging state-machines.

References

[1]
M. Abi-Antoun, J. Aldrich, N. Nahas, B. Schmerl, and D. Garlan. Differencing and merging of architectural views. In ASE, 2006. (To appear).
[2]
M. Alanen and I. Porres. Difference and union of models. In UML, pages 2--17, 2003.
[3]
M. Barr and C. Wells. Category Theory for Computing Science. CRM, Montréal, Canada, 1999.
[4]
C. Batini, M. Lenzerini, and S. Navathe. A comparative analysis of methodologies for database schema integration. ACM Computing Surveys, 18(4):323--364, 1986.
[5]
G. Brunet, M. Chechik, S. Easterbrook, S. Nejati, N. Niu, and M. Sabetzadeh. A manifesto for model merging. In Wkshp. on Global Integrated Model Management, 2006.
[6]
S. Easterbrook and B. Nuseibeh. Using viewpoints for inconsistency management. SE J., 11(1):31--43, 1996.
[7]
A. Egyed. Heterogeneous View Integration and its Automation. PhD thesis, USC, USA, 2000.
[8]
A. Finkelsetin, J. Kramer, B. Nuseibeh, L. Finkelstein, and M. Goedicke. Viewpoints: A framework for integrating multiple perspectives in system development. SEKE, 2(1):31--58, 1992.
[9]
Y. Kalfoglou and M. Schorlemmer. Ontology mapping: The state of the art. In Semantic Interoperability and Integration, number 04391 in Dagstuhl Seminars, 2005.
[10]
S. Nejati and M. Chechik. Let's agree to disagree. Tech. Rep. CSRG-530, U. of Toronto, 2005.
[11]
S. Nejati, M. Sabetzadeh, M. Chechik, S. Easterbrook, and P. Zave. Matching and merging of statecharts specifications. Submitted for publication, 2006.
[12]
D. Richards. Merging individual conceptual models of requirements. RE J., 8(4):195--205, 2003.
[13]
M. Sabetzadeh and S. Easterbrook. Analysis of inconsistency in graph-based viewpoints: A category-theoretic approach. In ASE, pages 12--21, 2003.
[14]
M. Sabetzadeh and S. Easterbrook. View merging in the presence of incompleteness and inconsistency. RE J., 11(3):174--193, 2006.
[15]
M. Sabetzadeh and S. Nejati. TReMer: A tool for relationship-driven model merging. In FM, 2006. Demo.
[16]
S. Uchitel and M. Chechik. Merging partial behavioural models. In FSE, pages 43--52, 2004.

Cited By

View all

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes
ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes  Volume 31, Issue 6
November 2006
182 pages
ISSN:0163-5948
DOI:10.1145/1218776
Issue’s Table of Contents

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 01 November 2006
Published in SIGSOFT Volume 31, Issue 6

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. distributed development
  2. modelling
  3. view merging
  4. view-based modelling

Qualifiers

  • Article

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)1
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 18 Feb 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all

View Options

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Figures

Tables

Media

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media