%0 Journal Article %1 barbier00object %A Barbier, Franck %A Henderson-Sellers, Brian %D 2000 %J Annals of Software Engineering %K research.conceptual research.cs.oo research.cs.softeng info.refs.journals.ansoft %N 1 %P 67--101 %T Object modelling languages: An evaluation and some key expectations for the future %U http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1018935632373 %V 10 %X Abstract  Object modelling languages are graphical semi-formal specification languages. They are tools to capture and formalise requirementsin the earlier phases of software development, as well as providing support for describing designs, software architectureand even detailed implementations later in the process. One can consider these languages to have reached some level of maturity,especially because their precursors, the Object-Oriented Analysis and Design methods, have now been used and tested intensivelyin industry for many years. In addition, these modelling languages have been the subject of many improvements by the scientificcommunity. Nevertheless, some dissatisfaction persists. In this paper, we aim to re-analyse several parts of the deep structureof two leading object modelling languages: OML and UML, in order to show how they can really increase software quality. Theirstructure is based on metamodelling, which is the way the semantics of these two languages is expressed. This structure isalso the source of a proliferation of modelling constructs (for example, different forms of inheritance associated with distinctnotational elements) whose use must clearly influence, in particular, reusability — a key expectation in a software engineeringprocess. More generally, we identify some deficiencies in these languages, which allows us to highlight some appropriate evolutionarypaths. In discussing dynamic metamodelling and scalability, we specifically outline that a main current drawback is the difficultyof implementing these languages in Computer-Aided Software Engineering tools.

@article{barbier00object, abstract = {Abstract  Object modelling languages are graphical semi-formal specification languages. They are tools to capture and formalise requirementsin the earlier phases of software development, as well as providing support for describing designs, software architectureand even detailed implementations later in the process. One can consider these languages to have reached some level of maturity,especially because their precursors, the Object-Oriented Analysis and Design methods, have now been used and tested intensivelyin industry for many years. In addition, these modelling languages have been the subject of many improvements by the scientificcommunity. Nevertheless, some dissatisfaction persists. In this paper, we aim to re-analyse several parts of the deep structureof two leading object modelling languages: OML and UML, in order to show how they can really increase software quality. Theirstructure is based on metamodelling, which is the way the semantics of these two languages is expressed. This structure isalso the source of a proliferation of modelling constructs (for example, different forms of inheritance associated with distinctnotational elements) whose use must clearly influence, in particular, reusability — a key expectation in a software engineeringprocess. More generally, we identify some deficiencies in these languages, which allows us to highlight some appropriate evolutionarypaths. In discussing dynamic metamodelling and scalability, we specifically outline that a main current drawback is the difficultyof implementing these languages in Computer-Aided Software Engineering tools.}, added-at = {2009-06-25T16:50:51.000+0200}, author = {Barbier, Franck and Henderson-Sellers, Brian}, biburl = {https://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/21dd40134cc51ed9531cec9d253805cdc/msn}, description = {SpringerLink - Journal Article}, file = {barbier00object.pdf:papers\\ansoft\\barbier00object.pdf:PDF}, interhash = {4590ec02a46f7fd55cba3b087c07a40e}, intrahash = {1dd40134cc51ed9531cec9d253805cdc}, journal = {Annals of Software Engineering}, keywords = {research.conceptual research.cs.oo research.cs.softeng info.refs.journals.ansoft}, month = {#nov#}, number = 1, pages = {67--101}, timestamp = {2009-06-25T16:50:51.000+0200}, title = {Object modelling languages: An evaluation and some key expectations for the future}, url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1018935632373}, volume = 10, year = 2000 }