Mahsa - Department of Computer Science

Feature-Based Survey of Model
Transformation Approaches
Krzysztof Czarnecki and Simon Helsen
in IBM Systems Journal, 2006
Mahsa Hasani Sadi
Department of Computer Science
University of Toronto
[email protected]
CS2125: Modeling Methods Tools and Techniques, Fall 2012
Instructor: Marsha Chechik
Background (1)
(2002) A Request for
Proposal on Query /
View / Transformation
Research Question:
How to design a model transformation approach?
2 of 29
Background (2)
Frameworks
Languages
Tools
Methods
Tefkat
MT
MOLA
UMLX
VIATRA
GReAT
Kent
3 of 29
YATL
AMW
ATL
Kermeta
BOTL
AToM
AGG
Outline of the Paper

Specification of the features of model
transformation approaches

Mandatory Features
The outline of presentation:
 Optional Features
 Clonable
Features
Studying
a set
of the design concerns
(features)
of Features
a model transformation
 xor-group
language through examples
 or-group Features

Classification of model transformation
approaches
4
4 of 29
Krzysztof Czarnecki
ECE Department
University of Waterloo
Features of Model Transformation
Model
Transformation
Specification
Tracing
Transformation
Rules
Directionality
Incrementality
Rule Application
Control
Rule
Organization
5
5 of 29
Source – Target
Relationship
Example: Transforming Class Diagrams to Relational Tables (1)
6
6 of 29
Example: Transforming Class Diagrams to Relational Tables (2)
Instances also matter!
7
7 of 29
Specification Feature (1)
transformation umlRdbms (uml : SimpleUML, rdbms : SimpleRDBMS)
{
relation PackageToSchema /* map each package to a schema */ {
domain uml p:Package {name=pn}
domain rdbms s:Schema {name=pn}
}
Not Executable
(Declarative Language)
}
8
8 of 29
Specification Feature (2)
transformation Uml2Rdbms ( in uml:UML , out rdbms:RDBMS ) {
// the entry point for the execution of the transformation
main()
{
uml.objectsOfType(Package) -> map packageToSchema();
}
…. }
9
9 of 29
Directly Executable
(Imperative Language)
Model Transformation Language Design Concerns
transformation umlRdbms (uml : SimpleUML, rdbms : SimpleRDBMS)
{
relation PackageToSchema /* map each package to a schema */ {
domain uml p:Package {name=pn}
domain rdbms s:Schema {name=pn}
Language
Paradigm
}
}
ObjectOriented
Logic
transformation Uml2Rdbms ( in uml:UML , out rdbms:RDBMS ) {
// the entry point for the execution of the transformation
main()
Functional
{
uml.objectsOfType(Package) -> map packageToSchema();
}
…. }
10
10 of 29
Procedural
Supported Syntax
Syntax
Concrete
Textual
transformation Uml2Rdbms ( in uml:UML , out rdbms:RDBMS ) {
// the entry point for the execution of the transformation
main()
{
uml.objectsOfType(Package) -> map packageToSchema();
}
…. }
11
11 of 29
Graphical
Transformation Rules Feature (1)
relation ClassToTable /* map each persistent class to a table */ {
domain uml c:Class { namespace = p:Package {},
kind='Persistent', name=cn }
domain rdbms t:Table { schema = s:Schema {}, name=cn}
when { PackageToSchema(p, s); Application
Conditions
}
where {
Post
AttributeToColumn(c, t);
Conditions
}
}
12
12 of 29
Transformation Rules Feature (2)
transformation umlRdbms (uml : SimpleUML, rdbms : SimpleRDBMS )
{ top relation PackageToSchema {…}
top relation ClassToTable {…}
relation AttributeToColumn {…}
Pre
Conditions
}
13
13 of 29
Transformation Rules Design Concerns
Static
Mode
relation PackageToSchema /* map each package
to a schema */ {
Dynamic Mode
Restriction
}
enforce domain uml p:Package {name=pn}
In
In / Out
checkonly domain rdbms s:Schema {name=pn}
In-Place
Transformation
Out
}
relation PackageToSchema /* map each package
to a schema */ {
Directionality
}
enforce domain uml p:Package {name=pn}
enforce domain rdbms s:Schema {name=pn}
Unidirectional
}
14
14 of 29
Multidirectional
Source – Target Relationship Feature
Source – Target
Relationship
Existing
Target
New Target
Update
Destructive
15
15 of 29
In-Place
Extension
Only
Tracing
relation ClassToTable {
enforce domain uml c:Class {namespace=p:Package {}, kind='Persistent', name=cn}
enforce domain rdbms t:Table {schema=s:Schema {}, name=cn}
}
class TClassToTable
{
c: Class;
p: Package;
t: Table;
s: Schema;
}
16
16 of 29
Tracing Feature
Tracing
Dedicated
Support
Storage
location
Creation
Manual
Model
Automatic
Source
17
17 of 29
Separate
Target
Incrementality Feature
Incrementality
TargetIncrementality
18
18 of 29
SourceIncrementality
Preservation
of User Edits
in Target
Pattern Matching Feature
Pattern
Pattern
Type = {
{
e1: <classname1>, e2: <classname2> …. en:<classnameN>
L1 : <assoc1> (ei, ej) …. Lm: <assocM>(eu, ew)
where <predicate>
}
Instances
c1: Class, a1: Attribute
L1: attrs (c1, a1)
where c1.name = X
and
<object>.<property> = <variable>
<object>.<property> = <expression>
19
19 of 29
a1.name = X + Y
}
Patterns Feature
Transformation
Rules
Domain
Body
Patterns
Variables
Syntax
Structure
Abstract
Strings
Terms
Concrete
Graphs
Textual
20
20 of 29
Graphical
Composing Transformation
Rule
Organization
library MyUmlFacilities(UML);
……..
transformation Uml2Rdbms (in uml:UML, out rdbms:RDBMS)
extends BasicUml2Rdbms, -- extending a transformation
extends library UMLUtilities(UML) -- extending a library
access library MathLibrary; -- accessing a math library
……..
Modularity
Mechanisms
Reuse
Mechanisms
Inheritance
21
21 of 29
Logical
Composition
Parallel Transformations
var tr1 := new Req2Pimgui(req, pimGui);
var tr2 := new Req2Pimbehavior(req, pimBehavior);
var st1 := tr1.parallelTransform(); // forks the PIM GUI transformation
var st2 := tr2.parallelTransform(); // forks the PIM Behavior transformation
this.wait(Set{st1,st2}); // waits patiently
if (st1.succeeded() and st2.succeeded()) // creates the executable model
new Pim2Psm(pimGui,pimBehavior,psm).transform();
22
22 of 29
Rule Application Control Feature
Rule Application
Control
Scheduling
RuleSelection
NonDeterminism
23
23 of 29
Explicit
Condition
Conflict
Resolution
Phasing
Interactive
Categorization of Model Transformation Approaches

Model to Text

Model to Model
24
24 of 29
Model to Text Approaches

Visitor-Based

Template-Based
25
25 of 29
Model-to-Model Approaches

Direct Manipulation

Structure-Driven

Operational

Relational

Template-Based

Graph-Transformation-Based

Hybrid
26
26 of 29
Comments (1)

Cited by 536 (publication year: 2006)

Revised version of another paper of the same authors,
“Classification of Model Transformation Approaches”,
in OOPSLA 2003. Cited by 732

Setting the foundation for “Meta Object Facility (MOF)
2.0, Query/ View/ Transformation Specification”, latest
version: January 2011, http://www.omg.org/spec/QVT
27
27 of 29
Evaluation of the paper

A Well-written journal paper????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

A journal paper????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Novelty ????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Significance of contributions??!!
Cited by 536
28
28 of 29
Discussion

Why a separate language for model-transformation?

What types of model transformations does the language
support? (Does it make any difference?)

Structural model to structural model?


Behavioral model to behavioral model?


29
Example: class to table ?
Example: state diagram to petri nets?
Structural model to behavioral model / vice versa?
29 of 29