Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
RE: [mdt-sbvr.dev] Thoughts about two approaches to modeling theMeaning & Representation (MRV) part of SBVR

Title: Message

Dave,

 

I’ll be at the meeting from Monday to Wednesday, but will be unavailable all day Monday. So Tuesday morning would work for me.

 

Cheers,

 

Kenn Hussey
Program Manager, Modeling and Design Solutions

[Embarcadero Technologies Logo]

Embarcadero Technologies, Inc. | www.embarcadero.com 
82 Peter Street, Second Floor | TorontoON  M5V 2G5
Kenn.Hussey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Office: 416-593-1585 x9296 Mobile: 613-301-9105

 

From: mdt-sbvr.dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:mdt-sbvr.dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Dave Carlson
Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 11:46 AM
To: 'SBVR developer list'
Subject: RE: [mdt-sbvr.dev] Thoughts about two approaches to modeling theMeaning & Representation (MRV) part of SBVR

 

Mark, et al,

 

My apologies for not responsing to this thread sooner.  Some urgent personal matters required me to take off a week or so, and I am still digging out...

 

I will be attending the OMG meeting in Santa Clara, CA next week, arriving late Sunday and leaving Friday afternoon.  Mark and Stan, will you be there?  Kenn?  Can we plan a meeting to dicuss these design alternatives?  I am unavailable Tuesday afternoon and all day Wednesday next week; I must attend the Open Health Tools board meeting that is co-located with OMG (see www.openhealthtools.org).  If anyone has an interest in business modeling for healthcare (BPMN and SBVR), I would also like to discuss that.

 

Regarding Mark's comment below, my greatest concern about using the EMF extension approach is (1) prevents, or complicates, use of many other EMF frameworks for validation, search, editor generation, edit transactions, etc., and (2) more difficult learning curve that will prevent other tool developers and product vendors from using this metamodel implementation.

 

I believe that it is essential for us to summarize several use cases for end-user tooling that will be implemented on top of this SBVR tooling metamodel.  How do these decisions help or hinder creation of "structured english" editors and publishing tools?  Search and repository tools?  Transformation to/from UML, OCL, or other design models?  Transformation to/from OWL and ODM?  Transformation to/from the SBVR exchange metamodel and serialization format?  Other tooling use cases?

 

Dave

 
The principle downside I see with the EMF extension approach is the risk that future changes in EMF could break the MRV implementation. This risk arises from the fact that the implementation depends upon some aspects of the EMF design. On the other hand, the EMF design is pretty open, so it would be hard to change it in significant ways without breaking lots of other code.
--------------------------------
Mark H. Linehan
STSM, Model Driven Business Transformation
IBM Research

phone: (914) 945-1038 or IBM tieline 862-1038
internet: mlinehan@xxxxxxxxxx


Back to the top