This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Astesiano, E., and Reggio, G., 2002, Knowledge Structuring and Representation in Requirement Specification, in: Proceedings of SEKE 2002, G. Tortora and S. K. Chang, eds., ACM Press, New York, pp. 143–150.
Balsters, H., 2003, Modelling Database Views with Derived Classes in the UML/OCL-framework, in: “UML” 2003 — The Unified Modeling Language: Modeling Languages and Applications, P. Stevens, J. Whittle, and G. Booch, eds., Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, LNSC 2863, pp. 295–309.
Bock, C., 2000, Goal-Driven Modeling, Journal of Object-Oriented Programming 13(5):48.
Bock, C., 1999, Three kinds of Behavior Model, Journal of Object-Oriented Programming 12(4).
Bordeleau, F., and Corriveau, J. P., 2000, From Scenarios to Hierarchical State Machines: A Pattern-Based Approach, in: Proc. of OOPSLA 2000 Workshop: Scenario-based round-trip engineering, T. Systa, ed., Tampere University of Technology, Software Systems Laboratory Report No. 20, pp. 13–18.
Braun, P., and Marschall, F., 2003, BOTL. The Bidirectional Object Oriented Transformation Language, Institut für Informatik Technische Universität München Report (unpublished), p. 170.
Breu, R., Grosu, R., Huber, F., Rumpe, B., and Schwerin, W., 1998, Systems, Views and Models of UML, in: The Unified Modeling Language, Technical Aspects and Applications, M. Schader and A. Korthaus, eds., Physica Verlag, Heidelberg, pp. 93–108.
Ceponiene, L., and Nemuraite, L., 2004, Design independent modeling of information systems using UML and OCL, in: Databases and Information Systems, Sixth International Baltic Conference BalticDB&IS 2004, J. Barzdins et al., eds., Riga, Latvia, June 6–9, 672, pp. 357–372.
Ceponiene, L., Nemuraite, L., and Paradauskas, B., 2003, Design of schemas of state and behaviour for emerging information systems, in: Computer Science Reports, Branderburg University of Technology at Cottbus, B. Thalheim and G. Fiedler, eds., 14, pp. 27–31.
Cheesman, J., and Daniels, J., 2000, UML Components, Adison Wesley, Boston, p. 208.
D’souza, D. F., and Wills, A. C., 1999, Objects, Components, and Frameworks with UML. The Catalysis Approach, Addison Wesley, Boston, p. 816.
Frankel, D., 2003, Model Driven Architecture: Applying MDA to Enterprise Computing, Wiley Publishing, Inc., Indianapolis, Indiana, p. 352.
Gardner, T., and Griffin, C., 2003, A Review of OMG MOF 2.0 Query/Views/Transformations Submissions and Recommendations Towards the Final Standard, OMG document ad/03-08-02 (May 3, 2004); http://www.omg.org.
Kleppe, A., Warmer, J., and Bast, W., 2003, MDA Explained. The Model Driven Architecture: Practice and Promise, Addison-Wesley, Boston, p. 192.
Makinen, E., and Systa, T., 2000, An interactive approach for synthesizing UML statechart diagrams from sequence diagrams, in: Proc. of OOPSLA 2000 Workshop: Scenario-Based Round-Trip Engineering, T. Systa, ed., Tampere University of Technology, Software Systems Laboratory Report No. 20, October, 7–12, Tampere, pp. 7–12.
Mellor, S. J., and Balcer, M. J., 2002, Executable UML. A Foundation for Model-Driven Architecture, Addison-Wesley, Boston, p. 368.
MOF 2.0 Query/Views/Transformations RFP, 2002, OMG document ad/2002-04-10 (May 3, 2004); http://www.omg.org.
MOF 2.0 Query/Views/Transformations Submission. Second Revised submission, 2004, submited by DSTC, IBM, CBOP, OMG document ad/2004-01-06 (May 3, 2004); http://www.omg.org.
Nemuraite, L., Kavaliauskaite L., and Ambrazevicius, E., 2002, Towards ensuring consistency to UML models, Informacijos Mokslai 24:85–97.
Reggio, G., Cerioli, M., and Astesiano, E., 2001, Towards rigorous semantics of UML supporting its multiview approach, in: Fundamental Approaches to Software Engineering FASE’01, H. Hussmann, ed., Springer-Verlag, Berlin, LNSC 2029, pp. 171–186.
Sendall, S., and Strohmeir, A., 2000, From use cases to system operation specifications, in: The Third International Conference on the Unified Modeling Language-UML’2000, A. Evans, S. Kent, and B. Selic, eds., Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, LNCS 1939, pp. 1–15.
Siegel, J., 2001, Developing in OMG’s Model-Driven Architecture, OMG document omg/01-12-01 (May 3, 2004); http://www.omg.org.
UML Profile for Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Specification, 2002, OMG document ptc/o2-02-05 (May 3, 2004); http://www.omg.org.
Unified Modeling Language Superstructure Specification Version 2.0, 2003, OMG document ptc/03-08-02 (May 3, 2004); http://www.omg.org.
Unified Modeling Language: OCL Version 2.0, 2003, OMG document ptc/03-08-08 (May 3, 2004); http://www.omg.org
Varro, D., Varro, G., and Pataricza, A., 2002, Designing the automatic transformation of visual languages, Science of Computer Programming 44:205–227.
Warmer, J. B., and Kleppe, A. G., 2000, The Object Constraint Language: Precise Modeling with UML, Addison Wesley, Boston, p. 112.
Whittle, J., and Schumann, J., 2000, Generating statechart designs from scenarios, in: International Conference on Software Engineering, C. Ghezzi, M. Jazayeri, and A. L. Wolf, eds., ACM Press, New York, pp. 314–323.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2005 Springer
About this paper
Cite this paper
Ceponiene, L., Nemuraite, L. (2005). Transformations of UML Diagrams for Reconciliation of Requirements. In: Vasilecas, O., Wojtkowski, W., Zupančič, J., Caplinskas, A., Wojtkowski, W.G., Wrycza, S. (eds) Information Systems Development. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-28809-0_26
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-28809-0_26
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-0-387-25026-7
Online ISBN: 978-0-387-28809-3
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)