A Formal Basis for Specifying Object Behaviour

  • Antony Bryant
  • Andy Evans
Part of the The Springer International Series in Engineering and Computer Science book series (SECS, volume 371)


In an earlier article [BE95] we outlined a project for formalizing some of the key concepts of object orientation (OO) as defined in the OMG’s (Object Management Group) core object model. Since OO is premised on interoperability and compatibility it is important that central aspects of the OO perspective provide a consistent basis for development and augmentation. In effect the OO world needs to have standards not only in the sense that there has to be some basis for effective but constrained development, reducing uncertainty and risk [95B]; but also because the essence of OO is cross-platform compatibility and reuse. The OMG’s core object model is one attempt to present a set of self-sufficient and consistent concepts which can act as a firm basis for the interdependence and further development of OO products and services. There are alternative approaches to the core object model, some of which may prove to be complementary; but given the size and visibility of the 0MG it is likely that some version or variant of the core object model will continue to figure in the OO world. OO demands universality and compatibility in some form, and it is more likely that it will be formed and sustained through a standard founded on cross-industry agreement than by monopoly or overwhelming cartel.


Object Type Core Model Schema Operation Object Management Group Object Orientation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

5 References

  1. [ABS94]
    Aujla, S., Bryant, A., & Semmens, L., ‘Applying Formal Methods within Structured Development’, IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, February 1994, volume 12,no 2Google Scholar
  2. [B95b]
    Bowman, H., et al, ‘FDTs for ODP’, Computer Standards and Interfaces, vol 17,nos 5–6, 1995.Google Scholar
  3. [B95]
    Bryant, A., Standardizing SSADM: Methods, Standards & Maturity, McGraw Hill, 1995Google Scholar
  4. [BE94]
    Bryant, A., & Evans, A., ‘00 Oversold’, Information & Software Technology, vol 36,no 1, 1994Google Scholar
  5. [BE95]
    Bryant, A., & Evans, A., ‘Formalizing the Object Management Group’s Core Object Model’, Computer Standards and Interfaces, vol 17,nos 5–6, 1995Google Scholar
  6. [C89]
    Cargill, C, Information Technology Standardization, Digital Press, 1989Google Scholar
  7. [E96]
    Evans, A., ‘Z for Concurrent Systems’, PhD Thesis, Leeds Metropolitan University, April, 1996.Google Scholar
  8. [HJ95]
    Houston, L, & Josephs, M., The OMG’s Core Object Model and compatible extensions to it, Computer Standards and Interfaces, vol 17,nos 5–6, 1995.Google Scholar
  9. [OMG94]
    OMG, Object Models, draft 0.2, October 1994Google Scholar
  10. [S92]
    Spivey, J.M., The Z Notation, 2nd Edition, Prentice Hall, 1992.Google Scholar
  11. [ST95]
    Sinnott., R. O. & Turner., K. J. ‘Applying Formal Methods to Standard Development. The ODP experience’, Computer Standards and Interfaces, vol 17,nos 5–6, 1995.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Antony Bryant
    • 1
  • Andy Evans
    • 2
  1. 1.School of Information ManagementLeed Metropolitan UniversityLeedsUK
  2. 2.Department of ComputingUniversity of BradfordBradfordUK

Personalised recommendations