A Workflow Variability Design Technique for Dynamic Component Integration

  • Chul Jin Kim
  • Eun Sook Cho
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3397)


Software development by component integration is the mainstream for Time-to-Market and is the solution for overcoming the short lifecycle of software. Therefore, the effective techniques for component integration have been working. But, the systematic and practical technique has not been proposed. Main issues for component integration are a specification for integration and the component architecture for operating the specification. In this paper, we propose a workflow variability design technique for component integration. This technique focuses on designing the connection contract based on the component architecture. The connection contract is designed to use the provided interface of component and the architecture can assemble and customize components through the connection contract dynamically.


Output Parameter Current Operation Product Family Component Architecture Require Interface 
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.


  1. 1.
    Bachman, F.: Technical Report, CMU/SEI-2000-TR-008, ESC-TR-2000-007Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kang, K.: Issues in Component-Based Software Engineering. In: 1999 International Workshop on Component-Based Software EngineeringGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    D’Souza, D.F., Wills, A.C.: Objects, Components, and Frameworks with UML. Addison Wesley Longman, Inc, Amsterdam (1999)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sora, I., Verbaeten, P., Berbers, Y.: Using Component Composition for Self-Customizable Systems. In: Workshop on CBSE, ECBS 2002, Lund, Sweden, April 8-11 (2002)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    e Silva, R.P., et al.: Component Interface Pattern. In: Procs. Pattern Languages of Program (1999) Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    The C2 Sytle,, Information and Computer Science, University of California, Irvine
  7. 7.
    Object Management Group: Object Constraint Language Specification, Version 1.3 (1999)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Atkinson, C., Bayer, J., Bunse, C., Kamsties, E., Laitenberger, O., Laqua, R., Muthig, D., Paech, B., Wust, J., Zettel, J.: Component-based Product Line Engineering with UML. Pearson Education Ltd, London (2002)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kim, C.J., Kim, S.D.: A Component Workflow Customization Technique, vol. 27(5). Korea Information Science Society (2000)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Heineman, G.T., Councill, W.T.: Component–Based Software Engineering. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2001)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    JavaWorld webzine,
  12. 12.
    ISO/IEC JTC1/SC7 N2419, DTR 9126-2: Software Engineering – Product Quality Part 2 – External Metrics (2001) Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jeffrey, S.P.: Measuring Software Reusability. IEEE Software (1994)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kim, S.D., Park, J.H.: C-QM: A Practical Quality Model for Evaluating COTS Components. IASTED, SE (2003)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Chul Jin Kim
    • 1
  • Eun Sook Cho
    • 2
  1. 1.School of Computer Science and Information EngineeringCatholic UniversityBucheon-si, Gyeonggi-doKorea
  2. 2.College of Computer and Information ScienceDongduk Women’s UniversitySeoulKorea

Personalised recommendations