Stereotypes were introduced into the UML in order to offer extensibility to the basic metamodel structure by the user and without actually modifying the metamodel. In UML version 1.x, this was accomplished by means of permitting virtual subtyping in the metamodel. However, this facilityled many to misuse stereotypes, particularly in places where regular domain-level modelling would be more appropriate. Inversion 2.0 of the UML, the portion of the metamodel pertaining to stereotypes was drastically revised. The resulting mechanismis reviewed here and compared with that of version 1.x. From a set theory point of view, the new (2.0) metamodel is unfortunatelyuntenable and the examples used in the OMG documentation unconvincing. This paper outlines the issues and suggests some possiblesteps to improve the UML 2.0 stereotype theory and practice.
%0 Journal Article
%1 hendersonSellers06stereotype
%A Henderson-Sellers, B.
%A Gonzalez-Perez, C.
%D 2006
%J Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems
%K research.conceptual.uml cites.wb
%P 16--26
%T Uses and Abuses of the Stereotype Mechanism in UML 1.x and 2.0
%U http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/11880240_2
%X Stereotypes were introduced into the UML in order to offer extensibility to the basic metamodel structure by the user and without actually modifying the metamodel. In UML version 1.x, this was accomplished by means of permitting virtual subtyping in the metamodel. However, this facilityled many to misuse stereotypes, particularly in places where regular domain-level modelling would be more appropriate. Inversion 2.0 of the UML, the portion of the metamodel pertaining to stereotypes was drastically revised. The resulting mechanismis reviewed here and compared with that of version 1.x. From a set theory point of view, the new (2.0) metamodel is unfortunatelyuntenable and the examples used in the OMG documentation unconvincing. This paper outlines the issues and suggests some possiblesteps to improve the UML 2.0 stereotype theory and practice.
@article{hendersonSellers06stereotype,
abstract = {Stereotypes were introduced into the UML in order to offer extensibility to the basic metamodel structure by the user and without actually modifying the metamodel. In UML version 1.x, this was accomplished by means of permitting virtual subtyping in the metamodel. However, this facilityled many to misuse stereotypes, particularly in places where regular domain-level modelling would be more appropriate. Inversion 2.0 of the UML, the portion of the metamodel pertaining to stereotypes was drastically revised. The resulting mechanismis reviewed here and compared with that of version 1.x. From a set theory point of view, the new (2.0) metamodel is unfortunatelyuntenable and the examples used in the OMG documentation unconvincing. This paper outlines the issues and suggests some possiblesteps to improve the UML 2.0 stereotype theory and practice.},
added-at = {2010-10-06T15:20:02.000+0200},
author = {Henderson-Sellers, B. and Gonzalez-Perez, C.},
biburl = {https://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2d8c479fdc5b4db4b3eaf80a4c75ee65c/msn},
description = {SpringerLink - Book Chapter},
file = {hendersonSellers06stereotype.pdf:papers\\models\\hendersonSellers06stereotype.pdf:PDF},
interhash = {141cd46d468f8e936c20128d575cf960},
intrahash = {d8c479fdc5b4db4b3eaf80a4c75ee65c},
journal = {Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems},
keywords = {research.conceptual.uml cites.wb},
pages = {16--26},
timestamp = {2010-10-06T15:20:03.000+0200},
title = {Uses and Abuses of the Stereotype Mechanism in UML 1.x and 2.0},
url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/11880240_2},
year = 2006
}