| EMF Meta Tooling [message #431943] |
Thu, 30 July 2009 09:28  |
 Anshu Jain
Messages: 4
Registered: July 2009 |
Junior Member |
|
|
Very sorry for positing this earlier under an existing message instead of
as a new message. It happened in error.
Hello All,
Recently I have been involved in working on a Rich Client Application
which is based on an EMF model, and the entire application is really about
building this EMF model.
After several iterations starting with Code from PDE Editor, moving to
multiple base classes, I eventually decided to create a simple UI
Metamodel which can model Views and Wizards for any domain mode, and then
written some code to render forms based view based on the application
model.
The existing available implementations/snippets of Forms for EMF were more
generic form based editors, which would need to be extended for
modification. I decided to take the approach of a simple UI metamodel
(based on EMF ofcourse) which can be instantiated for any EMF Class, and
then be edited using a simple tree and properties editor. This UI
Metamodel can then be rendered by my engine in the target Runtime.
I am of course getting driven towards extending this metamodel to include
the explorer and actions. In some sense a high level Metatooling for an
EMF Domain Model. Based on what I know of E4, and of IMP, they are much
more broader in the goals, and thus much more detailed tool metamodels.
Here assuming that I have in my scope applications which just need to work
on EMF metamodels, I want to keep the abstractions, at much higher level.
For e.g. my UI Metamodel is nothing more than specifying types and some
attributes of the controls (most of which are deduced in the
initialization of the model itself). It does not allow people to declare
layouts, and lower level details.
1. Am i doing redundant work? If yes, where should I look?
2. If No, do you think there is a need for such a high level EMF based
tooling platform, which goes beyong the generated editors of EMF..(we
already have IMP project..but I think it is much broader scope, and i have
limited knowledge) and does it makes sense to contributed something like
this..?
|
|
|
| Re: EMF Meta Tooling [message #431954 is a reply to message #431943] |
Thu, 30 July 2009 14:26  |
Ed Merks
Messages: 33136
Registered: July 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------090800080700020105080304
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Anshu,
Yes, I wondered why it was under a different thread. Chatting with the
PMF <http://www.eclipse.org/pmf/> folks would be good.
Anshu Jain wrote:
> Very sorry for positing this earlier under an existing message instead
> of as a new message. It happened in error.
> Hello All,
>
> Recently I have been involved in working on a Rich Client Application
> which is based on an EMF model, and the entire application is really
> about building this EMF model.
> After several iterations starting with Code from PDE Editor, moving to
> multiple base classes, I eventually decided to create a simple UI
> Metamodel which can model Views and Wizards for any domain mode, and
> then written some code to render forms based view based on the
> application model.
> The existing available implementations/snippets of Forms for EMF were
> more generic form based editors, which would need to be extended for
> modification. I decided to take the approach of a simple UI metamodel
> (based on EMF ofcourse) which can be instantiated for any EMF Class,
> and then be edited using a simple tree and properties editor. This UI
> Metamodel can then be rendered by my engine in the target Runtime.
> I am of course getting driven towards extending this metamodel to
> include the explorer and actions. In some sense a high level
> Metatooling for an EMF Domain Model. Based on what I know of E4, and
> of IMP, they are much more broader in the goals, and thus much more
> detailed tool metamodels. Here assuming that I have in my scope
> applications which just need to work on EMF metamodels, I want to keep
> the abstractions, at much higher level. For e.g. my UI Metamodel is
> nothing more than specifying types and some attributes of the controls
> (most of which are deduced in the initialization of the model itself).
> It does not allow people to declare layouts, and lower level details.
>
> 1. Am i doing redundant work? If yes, where should I look?
>
> 2. If No, do you think there is a need for such a high level EMF based
> tooling platform, which goes beyong the generated editors of EMF..(we
> already have IMP project..but I think it is much broader scope, and i
> have limited knowledge) and does it makes sense to contributed
> something like this..?
>
--------------090800080700020105080304
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-15
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-15"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Anshu,<br>
<br>
Yes, I wondered why it was under a different thread.
Ed Merks
Professional Support: https://www.macromodeling.com/
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.02132 seconds
] 
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
