This is the link: http://www.dstc.edu.au/pegamento/publications/index.html
see Model Transformation.
Also check out: http://www.metamodel.com
Yes, indeed the QVT for model to model transformation will be the very interesting stuff. But I think, it will take sometime before OMG releases the current spec for QVT with MOF 2.
Also, the way of AndroMDA, PIM -> Sourcecode without a true PSM, is a pragmatic way, especially if you don't have a good UML tool ;-)
-> PIM: the way to document your application model and communicate with your customers. Also known as Domain Concept in ARIS. IMO, this is the most important part. I myself don't see so much value on PSM. I prefer to have my code directly, instead of seeing UML diagrams with e.g. EJBObject, EJBHome classes, etc. and have to work with them.
One good thing with QVT would be to make transformation from PIM to PIM, for example.
Cheers, -- --------------------------------------------------- Blasius Lofi Dewanto --------------------------------------------------- OpenUSS - Open University Support System http://openuss.sourceforge.net --------------------------------------------------- E-Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ : 39343280 ---------------------------------------------------
Harald Weyhing schrieb: > Hi all, > > just read this Submission (sorry, I can't send the link right now, > because i am offline on train). > > This is interesting stuff. All of you have read about model to model > transformation of course and some will also have read that paper. The > approach is really interesting and in parts similar to the match concept > within XSLT. > Well I like the concept a lot there is one aspect in their examples I > would like to talk about with you: > > Say we transform some PIM in some PSM (UML to Java). As of my > understanding, the resulting PSM has > - java specific tags and elements > - no information that was only needed in the PIM > But, as described there is some mechnism that keeps track of the link > between source and result elements. This is thougth to be used for > "maintaining traceability information". > > I think there is another benefit within the possibility to "know" the > source object. You do not need to copy any information from source > elements to result elements during PIM to PSM transformation. For > example names, values, ranges and other information that would be needed > in both models might just stay in the PIM because you can find the > source element and ask it for those things. This should save some work > when writing transformations between models and from PSM to code. > Additionally the resulting PSM would really be PS. > > Any comments?? > > Cheers > Harald > > > > > > > >
------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1470&alloc_id=3638&op=click _______________________________________________ Andromda-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/andromda-user
