Relationship Type Refinement in Conceptual Models with Multiple Classification
The definition of a relationship type includes its participant entity types and the cardinality constraints. Relationship type refinement is the specification of additional constraints when some of the participant entities are also instances of other entity types. The best known types of refinements are refinement of participants and refinement of cardinality constraints.
These refinements have been studied, up to now, only for conceptual models with single classification. In this paper we extend previous work by dealing with conceptual models with multiple classification. We characterize the refinements in this context, provide a graphical and textual notation for their specification, and give their formal definition in logical terms. Moreover, we provide a set of necessary conditions to guarantee that a given set of refinements is valid.
KeywordsConceptual Schema Entity Type Integrity Constraint Single Classification Relationship Type
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- [BCN92]C. Batini; S. Ceri; S.B. Navathe. •Conceptual Database Design: an Entity-Relationship Approach•. The Benjamin/Cummings Pub. Co., 1992.Google Scholar
- [BG95]E. Bertino; G. Guerrini. “Objects with Multiple Most Specific Classes”. ECOOP 1995, pp. 102–126.Google Scholar
- [BO92]S.E. Bratsberg; E. Odberg. “Relation Refinement in Object-Relation Data Models.” Nordic Workshop on Programming and Software Development Research, Tampere (Finland), 1992.Google Scholar
- [Bub77]J.A. Bubenko. “The Temporal Dimension in Information Modelling”. In Architecture and Models in Data Base Management Systems. North-Holland, 1977, pp. 93–113.Google Scholar
- [CD94]S. Cook; J. Daniels. “Designing Object Systems: Object-Oriented Modeling with Syntropy”. Prentice-Hall, 1994.Google Scholar
- [CLF93]D. de Champeaux; D. Lea; P. Faure. “Object-Oriented System Development”. Addison-Wesley, 1994.Google Scholar
- [Len87]M. Lenzerini. “Covering and Disjointness Constraints in Type Networks“. Int. Conf. On Data Engineering, Los Angeles (California), 1987, pp. 386–393.Google Scholar
- [MO95]J. Martin; J. Odell. “Objects-Oriented Methods: a Foundation”. Prentice-Hall, 1995.Google Scholar
- [OCS99]A. Olivé, D. Costal, M.R. Sancho. “Entity Evolution in ISA Hierarchies”. Int. Conf. On Conceptual Modeling (ER.99), Paris (France), 1999, pp. 62–80.Google Scholar
- [RBP+91]J. Rumbaugh; M. Blaha; W. Premerlani et al. “Object-Oriented Modelling and Design”, Prentice-Hall, 1991.Google Scholar
- [RJB99]J. Rumbaugh; I. Jacobson and G. Booch. “The Unified Modeling Language Reference Manual”, Addison-Wesley, 1999.Google Scholar
- [SCG+]F. Saltor; M. Castellanos; M. Garcia et al. “Modelling Specialization as BLOOM Semilattices”. In Information Modelling and Knowledge Bases, IOS Press, Vol. VI, 1995.Google Scholar
- [WJS95]R. Wieringa; W. de Jong; P. Spruit. “Using Dynamic Classes and Role Classes to Model Object Migration”. Theory and Practice of Object Systems (TAPOS), Vol. 1(1), pp. 61–83, 1995.Google Scholar