Skip to main content

Why Timed Sequence Diagrams Require Three-Event Semantics

  • Conference paper
Scenarios: Models, Transformations and Tools

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNPSE,volume 3466))

Abstract

STAIRS is an approach to the compositional development of sequence diagrams supporting the specification of mandatory as well as potential behavior. In order to express the necessary distinction between black-box and glass-box refinement, an extension of the semantic framework with three event messages is introduced. A concrete syntax is also proposed. The proposed extension is especially useful when describing time constraints. The resulting approach, referred to as Timed STAIRS, is formally underpinned by denotational trace semantics. A trace is a sequence of three kinds of events: events for transmission, reception and consumption. We argue that such traces give the necessary expressiveness to capture the standard UML interpretation of sequence diagrams as well as the black-box interpretation found in classical formal methods.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Broy, M., Stølen, K.: Specification and Development of Interactive Systems: Focus on Streams, Interfaces, and Refinement. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Combes, P., Pickin, S., Renard, B., Olsen, F.: MSCs to express service requirements as properties on an SDL model: Application to service interaction detection. In: 7th SDL Forum (SDL1995), pp. 243–256. North-Holland, Amsterdam (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Damm, W., Harel, D.: LSCs: Breathing life into message sequence charts. In: Formal Methods for Open Object-Based Distributed Systems (FMOODS 1999), pp. 293–311. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Engels, A., Mauw, S., Reniers, M.A.: A hierarchy of communication models for message sequence charts. In: Formal Description Tecniques and Protocol Specification, Testing and Verification, pp. 75–90. Chapman and Hall, Boca Raton (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Haugen, Ø.: Using MSC-92 effectively. In: 7th SDL Forum (SDL 1995), pp. 37–49. North-Holland, Amsterdam (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Haugen, Ø.: MSC-2000 interaction diagrams for the new millennium. Computer Networks 35, 721–732 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Haugen, Ø., Husa, K.E., Runde, R.K., Stølen, K.: Why timed sequence diagrams require three-event semantics. Technical Report 309, Department of Informatics, University of Oslo (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Harel, D., Marelly, R.: Specifying and executing behavioral requirements: The play-in/play-out approach. Software and System Modeling 2, 82–107 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Haugen, Ø., Stølen, K.: STAIRS – Steps to analyze interactions with refinement semantics. In: Stevens, P., Whittle, J., Booch, G. (eds.) UML 2003. LNCS, vol. 2863, pp. 388–402. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  10. International Telecommunication Union. Recommendation Z.120 — Message Sequence Chart, MSC (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  11. International Telecommunication Union. Recommendation Z.120 Annex B: Algebraic Semantics of Message Sequence Charts (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  12. International Telecommunication Union. Recommendation Z.120 Annex B: Formal Semantics of Message Sequence Charts (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  13. International Telecommunication Union. Recommendation Z.120 — Message Sequence Chart, MSC (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Jacobson, I., Booch, G., Rumbaugh, J.: The Unified Software Development Process. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Krüger, I.: Distributed System Design with Message Sequence Charts. PhD thesis, Technische Universität München (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Object Management Group. Unified Modeling Language, Version 1.4 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Object Management Group: UML 2.0 Superstructure Specification, document: ptc/04-10-02 edition (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Reniers, M.A.: Message Sequence Chart: Syntax and Semantics. PhD thesis, Eindhoven University of Technology (1998)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2005 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Haugen, Ø., Husa, K.E., Runde, R.K., Stølen, K. (2005). Why Timed Sequence Diagrams Require Three-Event Semantics. In: Leue, S., Systä, T.J. (eds) Scenarios: Models, Transformations and Tools. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 3466. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/11495628_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/11495628_1

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-26189-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-32032-6

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics