[news.eclipse.modeling.gmt.amw] Re: question about different forms of am

[Marcos Didonet Del Fabro <mddfabro@xxxxxxx>]

Hello,

The use case 1-"Keys2Nested_AMW2XSLT" was developed previously than 
2-"Keys2Nested_AMW2ATL".

The metamodel of 2 is an evolution of 1. (some expressions that were not 
used were deleted), but they have the same base purpose.
The major difference between both examples is the higher-order 
transformation (HOT), because it will produce a different output 
transformation model (XSLT or ATL), depending on the use case.
The examples are supposed to be independent, so I didn't use any 
flag/naming convention to differ them (e.g., a version number).

The .ecore and .amw files are both weaving models, and they are 
serialized in the same way (no conversion needed). You can use the .amw 
files in the transformations as well, you just need to set the correct 
file path.

We changed the extension to .amw because it is more precise, i.e., the 
files are weaving models, and they conform to the corresponding 
"mwcore.ecore" metamodel. The latest versions of AMW need the .prop file 
to open a weaving model. Previously, the .prop files were hidden in the 
metadata.


Regards,

Marcos.


> 1. the metamodels are different (though with the same name "mwcore.ecore" ). 
> Is it by design in order to serve different purpose? Must it be defined in 
> that way in order to support XSLT generation?
> 2. the models are in differnt forms.  In Keys2Nested_AMW2ATL it is a .amw 
> file plus a .prop file, however in Keys2Nested_AMW2XSLT it is a .ecore file. 
> I think they are just varies format containing same information, and the 
> .amw+.prop formats are just designed to be open from Weaver Editor UI, am I 
> correct?
> But, since this Keys2Nested_AMW2XSLT the HOT ATL only accept .ecore format 
> amw model, I am wondering is there easy way to convert the same amw model 
> between .ecore and .amw+.prop format back and force?
>
>
> Thanks
> Leon