Eclipse Community Forums
Forum Search:

Search      Help    Register    Login    Home
Home » Archived » M2M (model-to-model transformation) » [ATL] Refining with different input and output model (extension)
[ATL] Refining with different input and output model (extension) [message #552991] Sun, 15 August 2010 15:19 Go to next message
Kirsten M. Z. is currently offline Kirsten M. Z.
Messages: 131
Registered: July 2010
Senior Member
Hi @all,

the refining mode for ATL works fine if input and output model are equal (e.g. UML to UML).

However, I have another use case. I have extended UML by one class, let's say I have "ExtendedUML". Unfortunately, transformation does not work any more (I get an empty result). Therefore, I wanted to know, if I can get it working at all.

------------------------------------
module TestTransformation;

-- @path ExtendedUML=extendedUML.ecore
-- @nsURI UML=http://www.eclipse.org/uml2/2.1.0/UML

create OUT: ExtendedUML refining IN: UML;
------------------------------------

I am using ATL with Topcased 4.0.0.

Thanks!
Regards,
Kirsten

[Updated on: Sun, 15 August 2010 15:19]

Report message to a moderator

Re: [ATL] Refining with different input and output model (extension) [message #553039 is a reply to message #552991] Mon, 16 August 2010 04:12 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Sylvain EVEILLARD is currently offline Sylvain EVEILLARD
Messages: 522
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
The metamodel has to be the same for the refining mode. For this case, two solutions would be possible :
- a brutal copy transformation super-imposed with the rules of your refining transformation (may take much more time than refining mode)
- "cast" the input model as a model conforming to your UML extension so that you can use your extended metamodel as input&output metamodel
Re: [ATL] Refining with different input and output model (extension) [message #554267 is a reply to message #553039] Fri, 20 August 2010 16:35 Go to previous message
Kirsten M. Z. is currently offline Kirsten M. Z.
Messages: 131
Registered: July 2010
Senior Member
Thanks for this simple answer and the workarounds. While the first option, is not really an options, the second possibility would require manual effort for each transformation or an automated process. This automated process would be an "model transformation" Wink Unfortunately, I cannot use ATL for that Wink)

I checked Operational QVT now. It is still not obvious, but I could implement my use case. However, in my eyes QVT is much harder than ATL, so basically I would prefer ATL.

Just as comment: would be a nice feature if ATL was able to do this. Extending/Refining UML is not uncommon, so ATL would be a excellent tool.
Previous Topic:QVT transformation inside plug-in
Next Topic:[QVTo] Error when executing transformation from Java.
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Fri Aug 29 20:24:34 EDT 2014

Powered by FUDForum. Page generated in 0.01608 seconds