1 / 23

Model-driven development of SOA with Web services – using QVT technology

Model-driven development of SOA with Web services – using QVT technology. Master thesis by Berge Stillingen Department of Informatics, University of Oslo 2005. Problem domain and scope. SOA Service Oriented Architecture Focus is set on Web services MDA Model Driven Architecture

navid
Download Presentation

Model-driven development of SOA with Web services – using QVT technology

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Model-driven development of SOA with Web services – using QVT technology Master thesis by Berge Stillingen Department of Informatics, University of Oslo 2005

  2. Problem domain and scope • SOA • Service Oriented Architecture • Focus is set on Web services • MDA • Model Driven Architecture • Framework for model-driven development • QVT • Query/Views/Transformations • Upcoming standard for model-to-model transformations from OMG • MOF2Text • MOF Model to Text Transformations • Upcoming standard for model-to-text transformations from OMG • Thesis approach: • Where is QVT today? • Is QVT the right answer when developing SOA using MDD?

  3. Contents I: Feature analysis: QVT/MOF2Text candidates II: MOSUQ: SOA/QVT/MOF2Text framework • Concepts • Transformation assets for Java Web services III: Case study: Min/Max replenishment system specified using the framework

  4. (I) Feature analysis • Evaluating proposals to the QVT and MOF2Text standards and belonging software (proof of concept) • Analyze their features deriving criteria/requirements from the QVT and MOF2Text RFPs (Request For Proposals to standards) • Add additional tool-specific requirements for the proofs of concept • Give points for each criteria (e.g. 2/5) • The 2 alternatives: • Sum up and use the “winning” alternative to specify transformations for a SOA-MDD framework and case study

  5. Requirements/Evaluation criteriaModel-to-model trans. (QVT) • Declarative transformation definitions/Model querying • Based on OCL • Incremental transformations • Reuse of existing OMG specifications • OCL, UML, MOF (Meta Object Facility) • MOF 2.0 based transformations/models • Additional transformation data • Traceability • Importing for debugging • Graphical and textual notation • …

  6. Requirements/Evaluation criteriaModel-to-text trans. (MOF2Text) • Reuse of existing OMG language specifications • MOF 2.0 based mappings/source models • Functions for string manipulation • Combining model data with clear text • Complex text transformation mappings • Most mappings are one-to-one (isomorphic) • More non-trivial mappings may occurs • Multiple models and support for UML extensibility mechanism • …

  7. Requirements/Evaluation criteriaOther requirements. (tool-specific) Note: Applies to the proofs-of-concept in both alternatives and both QVT and MOF2Text. • OMG standards • UML 2.0 and XMI 2.0 support • Explicit UML profile support using multiple files • Code assistance • Debugging facilities • Testing well-formedness

  8. Feature analysis results • Alternative 1 wins with a 63% score (alt.2 gets a 55% score) • Low scores, especially on model-to-model transformations • Results worst for the tool-specific req. (other req.) • OptimalJ: Gives Alt 2. a better score. A more “easy to use” tool than ATL/MOFScript

  9. (II) MOSUQ – SOA QVT Framework • Model-driven development Of Service Oriented Architectures Using QVT • Implies use of the MOF2Text standard as well • Combined QVT and MOF2Text usage • Serve conceptual guidelines for MDD of SOA using the two standards • Specified concretely for Java Web services • Transformations assets: • QVT Merge relations (graphical) • QVT Merge mappings (textual) • ATL transformations • COMET’s Service Architecture modeling

  10. MOSUQ concepts • Draw a COMET based Service Architecture Model • Use COMET stereotypes • Define a PSM domain for a SOA based platform (main platform) • Define wanted artifacts at the code level • Identify “sub-platforms” for the PSM domain • Defined by UML profiles or MOF metamodels • Refine the PSM domain • Add transformations between the abstraction layers • Use 3 or more abstraction layers

  11. MDD Java Web services • 4 sub-platforms identified • WSDL (using MOF metamodel) • JAX-RPC • Java • Sun/J2EE • Details of the three latter reflected in a UML profile • PSM domain refined • 4 transformations added refined

  12. Metamodels for the PSMs (1) • UML 2.0 MM • With Java Web services UML profile

  13. Metamodels for the PSMs (2) • WSDL metamodel

  14. MDD Java Web services • Transformation assets: • QVT Merge relations • QVT Merge mappings • ATL code • MOFScript code realizing implementing

  15. Service Model ATL engine MOFScript engine Implementing transformations -Working environment Eclipse based IDE: Rational Software Modeler + ATL transformation engine + MOFScript Target metamodel (EMF) Source metamodel (EMF) ATL code XMI XMI Platform model (UML profile or MOF metamodel based) XMI Code/ text artefacts Source metamodel (EMF) MOFScript code

  16. Case study: Min/Max Replenishment - applying the MOSUQ framework

  17. Case study: Min/Max Replenishment- Service Architecture Model (COMET) • Component model • Interface Model • Information Model • PIM Data types

  18. Case study: Min/Max Replenishment- Platform models (1) • WS UML model • Trans 1. applied

  19. Case study: Min/Max Replenishment- Platform models (2) • WSDL model • Shown as object diagram • Trans. 2 applied

  20. Case study: Min/Max Replenishment- Code artefacts • Java Code • Transformation 3 applied • Value object classes • Web service interface classes • Web service implementation classes • Validated with Eclipse’s Java compiler • WSDL (XML) • Transformation 4 applied • Example with Rpc/literal messaging style • Validated with a WDSL XML Schema instance

  21. Why use MOSUQ?- especially concerning the generation of Java code and WSDL documents • No PSM (traditional) approach: • PIM to text transformation (code generation) • Annotation of PIMs (stereotypes, tagged values) • w/Additional transformation data • No intermediate PSMs • One transformation per target artefact at the implementation level (code etc.) • Only one language to use • MOSUQ (more MDA adherent): • PIM to PSM transformations • PSM to text and/or PSM to PSM transformations • Commit to multiple ways (languages) of specifying transformation assets • Ensures correcting structuring of target specifications reflecting code/text at the implementation level • Given a well-defined metamodel. • Less chance of generating text artefacts violating syntax • Separation of concerns • Formalizing the details of identified platforms by using MM

  22. Conclusions- summary of contributions • Evaluation of proposals to QVT and MOF2Text with their belonging proofs-of-concept • Feature analysis: 63% score on alt. 1 (QVT Merge/ATL/MOFScript) • Still work to be done, especially on the tool side • MOSUQ – SOA/QVT framework • Transformations assets • Subject to reuse/alterations • ATL code (difficult and time-consuming) • MOFScript code • QVT Merge specifications • Has proven that the QVT and MOF2Text standards can be combined to realize MDD of SOA • An alternative to MDD of SOA

  23. Future work • Alternative QVT-tools: • AMW/AMMA (INRIA) • Lets you define correspondence specifications in the form of weaving models between model artefacts • Capable of expressing symmetric rules • Transformations in different languages can be generated (XSLT, ATL) • Model Transformation Framework (MTF) • Consistency-checking capabilities • MOSUQ enhancements • Apply other PSM profiles for SOA impl.: • BPEL/BPMN • Configuration files (DD etc) • CORBA/IDL • XML registries and UDDI • dot NET platform

More Related