Eclipse Community Forums
Forum Search:

Search      Help    Register    Login    Home
Home » Modeling » Modeling (top-level project) » Core Infrastructure Metamodel for DSLs
Core Infrastructure Metamodel for DSLs [message #540490] Wed, 16 June 2010 07:49 Go to next message
Luca Berardinelli is currently offline Luca Berardinelli
Messages: 15
Registered: June 2010
Junior Member
Dear all,
I'm looking for the Core metamodel described in the UML 2 Infrastructure document at OMG. I want extend it to define a new DSL. This DSL will be "weaved" with UML using the AMMA platform. In particular I need a "Core.ecore" metamodel or something similar that can be automatically transformed into .ecore (in order to integrate it in AMMA).
Thanks in advance.

Luca
Re: Core Infrastructure Metamodel for DSLs [message #540558 is a reply to message #540490] Wed, 16 June 2010 10:02 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ed Merks is currently offline Ed Merks
Messages: 25917
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Luca,

I'm not sure if you're referring to EMOF, which is effectively
Ecore.ecore in the org.eclipse.emf.ecore plugin. The UML2 project
provided UML2.ecore in the org.eclipse.uml2.uml plugin.


Luca Berardinelli wrote:
> Dear all,
> I'm looking for the Core metamodel described in the UML 2
> Infrastructure document at OMG. I want extend it to define a new DSL.
> This DSL will be "weaved" with UML using the AMMA platform. In
> particular I need a "Core.ecore" metamodel or something similar that
> can be automatically transformed into .ecore (in order to integrate it
> in AMMA).
> Thanks in advance.
>
> Luca
Re: Core Infrastructure Metamodel for DSLs [message #540583 is a reply to message #540558] Wed, 16 June 2010 10:55 Go to previous message
Luca Berardinelli is currently offline Luca Berardinelli
Messages: 15
Registered: June 2010
Junior Member
Ed,
first of all thanks for your "real-time" reply.
I try to clarify what I'm doing. I want to define the metamodel for a DSL including some particular structural features (maybe some behavioral one). I'm planning to weave it with a UML model suitably extended with several profiles.

In order to facilitate the mapping between the DSL and UML I would reuse the Core::Abstraction and/or Core::Basic packages described in the UML Infrastructure (as suggested by the authors of the UML Infrastracture). I supposed that somewhere online I could find a .ecore specification of these packages but I failed.

Actually I've decided to reduce the UML Kernel from uml.ecore.
At first I decided to follow the Core::[X] specification to do everything by scratch but it is time-expensive and, above all, I don't know how to deal with "Subset Properties" in EMF.

I supposed to use Core::[X] as a kernel and adopt a "positive approach" by adding via specialization new metaclasses for my DSL. Instead I'm feeling "forced" to apply a "negative approach" by removing the surplus from the UML Metamodel.

The other possibility can be the use of Ecore.ecore and apply the "positive approach". Anyway in the first case I'm working always at level M2 whereas it seem strange (but legal!) to me reuse and extend Ecore (M3) for defining new metamodels (M2).

Luca Berardinelli

Re: Core Infrastructure Metamodel for DSLs [message #619730 is a reply to message #540558] Wed, 16 June 2010 10:55 Go to previous message
Luca Berardinelli is currently offline Luca Berardinelli
Messages: 15
Registered: June 2010
Junior Member
Ed,
first of all thanks for your "real-time" reply.
I try to clarify what I'm doing. I want to define the metamodel for a DSL including some particular structural features (maybe some behavioral one). I'm planning to weave it with a UML model suitably extended with several profiles.

In order to facilitate the mapping between the DSL and UML I would reuse the Core::Abstraction and/or Core::Basic packages described in the UML Infrastructure (as suggested by the authors of the UML Infrastracture). I supposed that somewhere online I could find a .ecore specification of these packages but I failed.

Actually I've decided to reduce the UML Kernel from uml.ecore.
At first I decided to follow the Core::[X] specification to do everything by scratch but it is time-expensive and, above all, I don't know how to deal with "Subset Properties" in EMF.

I supposed to use Core::[X] as a kernel and adopt a "positive approach" by adding via specialization new metaclasses for my DSL. Instead I'm feeling "forced" to apply a "negative approach" by removing the surplus from the UML Metamodel.

The other possibility can be the use of Ecore.ecore and apply the "positive approach". Anyway in the first case I'm working always at level M2 whereas it seem strange (but legal!) to me reuse and extend Ecore (M3) for defining new metamodels (M2).

Luca Berardinelli


Luca Berardinelli
Previous Topic:Core Infrastructure Metamodel for DSLs
Next Topic:Are there standard "eAnnotations" to help metamodeling?
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Thu Jul 24 04:25:52 EDT 2014

Powered by FUDForum. Page generated in 0.03840 seconds