Abstract
The following article is motivated by the current efforts of the Object Management Group (OMG) to standardize object-oriented modelling languages. In the face of the great economic importance of such a standardization, a careful consideration of possible requirements for modelling languages is necessary. The development of suitable criteria and measures is, however, a delicate task. One reason for this is that the various tasks during the software engineering demand different, partly contradictory, requirements. Beyond this the valuation of quality is not independent from individual preferences and patterns of perception.
In this article, we will give a framework for evaluating modelling languages. We will consider different levels of requirements—from subjective ones, like clarity of notation, to technical ones, like completeness and correctness of the language description Finally we will use this framework for the comparison between OML and UML. An extended version of this comparison can be found in Frank and Prasse (1997).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
ACHATZ, K. and SCHULTE, W. (1996): Formale objektorientierte Softwareentwicklung. In Beiträge der GI-Fachtagung Softwaretechnik ‘86. Koblenz. P. 24–32.
ARNOLD, P., BODOFF, S., COLEMAN, D., GILCHRIST, H., and HAYES, F. (1991): An Evaluation of Five Object-Oriented Development Methods. Report No. HPL-91–52, June 1991 Bristol
BIGGS, P. (1997): A Survey of Object-Oriented Methods. URL: http://www.dur.ac.uk/~dcs3pjb/survey.html
BOOCH, G. (1994): Object-oriented Analysis and Design with applications. 2nd ed., Redwood/CA.: Benjam in Cummings
CRIBBS, J., ROE, C., and MOON, S. (1992): An Evaluation of Object-Oriented Analysis and Design Methodologies. New York: SIGS Books
DE CHAMPEAUX, D. and FAURE, P. (1992): A comparative study of object-oriented analysis methods. In: Journal of Object-Oriented Programming (JOOP), Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 21–33
FIRESMITH, D., HENDERSON-SELLERS, B., GRAHAM, I., and PAGE-JONES, M. (1996): OPEN Modeling Language (OML). Reference Manual. Version 1.0. 8 December 1996. URL: http://www.csse.swin.edu.au/OPEN/comn.html
FRANK, U. (1993): A Comparison of two Outstanding Methodologies for Object-Oriented Design. Arbeitspapiere der GMD, No. 779, Sankt Augustin
FRANK, U. (1997): Towards a Standardization of Object-Oriented Modeling Languages? Arbeitsberichte des Instituts fuer Wirtschaftsinformatik, Nr. 3, Koblenz. URL: http://www.uni-koblenz.de/~iwi/
FRANK, U. and PRASSE, M. (1997): Ein Bezugsrahmen zur Beurteilung objektorientierter Modellierungssprachen—veranschaulicht am Beispiel von OML und UML. Arbeitsberichte des Instituts für Wirtschaftsinformatk, Nr. 6, Koblenz 1997. URL: http://www.uni-koblenz.de/~iwi/
HENDERSON-SELLERS, B. and BULTHUIS, A. (1996): The COMMA Project: Final Report (First draft for limited circulation to methodologists and collaborators) nr. 95/36, pp. 1–45, 1996. Swinburne University of Technology. Sydney, Australia. URL: http://www.csse.swin.edu.au/cotar
HEWLETT PACKARD (1991): An Evaluation of Five Object-Oriented Development Methods. Software Engineering Department, HP Laboritories. Bristol
HONG, S. and GOOR, G. (1993): A Formal Approach to the Comparison of Object-Oriented Analysis and Design Methodologies. In: Nunamaker, J.F.; Sprague, R.H. (Ed.): Information Systems: Collaboration Technology, Organizational Systems, and Technolgoy. Proceedings of the 26th International Hawaii International Conferenc on System Sciences. Los Alamitos, pp. 689–698
HSIEH, D. (1992): Survey of object-oriented analysis/design methodologies and future CASE frameworks. Menlo Park, Ca.
JACOBSON, I., CHRISTERSON, M., JONSSON, P., and OVERGAARD, G. (1992): Object-Oriented Engineering. A Use Case Driven Approach. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley
KOWALK, W.P. (1996): System—Modell—Programm. Heidelberg, Berlin, Oxford: Spektrum
MONARCHI, D.E. and PUHR, G. (1992): A Research Typology for Object-Oriented Analysis and Design. In: Communications of the ACM, Vol. 35, No. 9, 1992, pp. 35–47
RATIONAL (1997a): UML Semantics. Version 1.0. 13.01.1997. URL: http://www.rational.com
RATIONAL (1997b): UML Notation Guide. Version 1.0. 13.01.1997. URL: http://www.rational.com
RATIONAL (1997c): UML-Summary. Version 1.1. 01.09.1997. URL: http://www.rational.com
RATIONAL (1997d): OCL. Version 1.1. 01.09.1997. URL: http://www.rational.com
RATIONAL (1997e): UML-Notation Guide. Version 1.1. 01.09.1997. URL: http://www.rational.com
RATIONAL (1997f): UML-Semantics. Version 1.1. 01. 09. 1997.
RUMBAUGH, J., BLAHA, M., PREMERLANI, W., EDDY, F., and LORENSEN, W. (1991): Object-Oriented Modeling and Design, Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
RUMBAUGH, J. (1996): Notation notes: Principles for choosing notation In: Journal of Object-Oriented Programming (JOOP, Vol. 8, No. 10, Mai 1996, pp. 11–14
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1998 Physica-Verlag Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Prasse, M. (1998). Evaluation of Object-Oriented Modelling Languages: A Comparison Between OML and UML. In: Schader, M., Korthaus, A. (eds) The Unified Modeling Language. Physica-Verlag HD. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-48673-9_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-48673-9_5
Publisher Name: Physica-Verlag HD
Print ISBN: 978-3-7908-1105-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-48673-9
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive