|uml (middleweight) metamodel extension [message #660444]
||Fri, 18 March 2011 12:54
Originally posted by: ss.thinkersfoot.net|
dear mdt/uml2 list members,
i am trying to realise a small uml metamodel extension which i found
reported in a paper based on mdt/uml2 & friends. essentially, it adds a
set of 4 specialising meta-classes plus ocl constraints to the activity
meta-model. for my first shot, i opted for the middleweight approach
(given that the approach in the paper expects a meta-model extension of
this sort and i still hope to gain some tooling reuse here). i haven't
touched ocl checking at this point ...
i based my initial attempt on the various documents provided by kenn and
i basically reproduced the steps in the doc titled "Heavyweight
extension" > "Heavy-weight extension process"
(in my understanding, without then reproducing in the genmodel step the
entire uml2 meta-model, this corresponds to the middleweight approach
which simply references rather then copies all the reps of the uml2
now, i am having a UML meta-model extension with four specialising
meta-classes (referencing -- i.e. pathmapping -- the UML.metamodel.uml &
friends), i got the corresponding genmodel and generated the plug-in
artifacts. when firing up the plug-in, i get a meta-model specific
however, my needs are different: i need the capacity to model stock
activity models *plus* the four extension items. i tried switching back
and forth between the uml editor and the meta-model editor (opening a
model file either way), hoping to model an activity model in the one,
adding the meta-model-specific elements in the other. I took this "idea"
from the tutorial on UML profiles + domain meta-model:
i am most probably missing the obvious here, id appreciate any help on this!
Powered by FUDForum
. Page generated in 0.01485 seconds