Zinovy Diskin and Juergen Dingel,
Queen’s UniversityKingston, Ontario, Canada
A metamodel independent framework for model transformation: Towards generic model management patterns in reverse engineering
Motivation. A big picture: RE as a generic MMt play
Slide 2
RE
MT generic MMt
Metadata management mathCT
MT-programming (on the left) via PB (pull-back) (right)
Source model S;Source metamodel MS;
Target metamodel MT;
TransformationEngine
TransformationSpec (rules), PB-algorithm
Source model;Metamodel mapping,
MT MS
Target model
Trace mapping
Target model
Trace mapping
MT in universal (not elementwise) terms(specification vs. implementation)
Slide 4
S
MT
mMS
T
m*
[ = ]
T’
’
m*’
u!
(1) Definition:
(T,,m*) = PB(, m)
(2) Theorem [an elementwise implementation of def(1)] :
T = {(e,y) S x MT | e. = y.m }
Th. (2) gives rise to a procedure implementing specification (1)
MT-via-PB: separation of concerns
Slide 5
S
MT
mMS
T
m*
derQMS
Q
derQS
[ algExp] (query exec)
[PB](retyping)
Declarativepart
Proceduralpart
Example: extracting ER-diagrams from SQL-tables(simplified)
Does PB works? Yes, if we use proper (Kleisly) mappings to derived elements.
How essential are derived elements?
Relational metamodel augmented with derived elements to interpret ER-metamodel.
Semantics of data is hidden in the application code.
Example of PB-execution over graphs
UML SemanticsPresentation
Page 11
mathCT
