Lightweight Extensions <--> non dynamic ecore ? [message #597058] |
Wed, 30 May 2007 10:37 |
Stefan Kuhn Messages: 355 Registered: July 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
hi folks,
User:
first of all I'm not really into UML2 profiles ;)
Story:
What I want to do is creating a DSL Editor with GMF which reads/writes
UML2 conform XMI-'code'. We've sketched a DSL based on UML2 so I guess I
have to define a profile. "easy" so far.
Problems:
My concern is how I get the profile in an ecore representation needed
for GMF. In "Applying UML Profile for Domain Metamodel" by Yves Yang it
is described how to get one for HeavyWeight extensions (still have to
check if this works).
What confueses me is in the presentation "What do YOU want UML to be?"
at EclipseCon2k7 it is mentioned that the stereotypes of Lightweight
Extensions (which I guess is all I need) are stored as dynamic EMF
objects (p.54). Now afaik the GMF framework doesn't handle these dynamic
objects (the GMF runtime does).
Questions:
So I have to use Heavyweight Extensions? Can I always open the models
made with my DSL-Editor in UML Tools and vice versa?
For which profiling techniques mentioned in "Customizing UML: Which
technique is right for you?" does this applies?
What are the biggest stumbling blocks I have to take care of using
uml-profiles and GMF?
(Is it a good idea to forget about the UML Tools and simply extend some
classes of the UML2.ecore? What are the benefits of going the UML way?)
Off Topic Question:
I posted this question in eclipse.modeling.mdt.uml2tools /
eclipse.modeling.gmf because I guess it concerns all 2. Is there
something wrong with this way?
-stefan
Answers:
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.01974 seconds