Eclipse Community Forums: M2M (model-to-model transformation) » [ATL] Refining with different input and output model (extension)

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

Eclipse User

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] by 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

Eclipse User

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

Eclipse User

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:

-=] Back to Top [=-

Current Time: Wed Jul 23 15:32:30 EDT 2025

.:: Contact :: Home ::.

Breadcrumbs

Sign up to our Newsletter