Gianna Reggio (email@example.com)
Tue, 18 Jul 2000 16:08:01 +0100
UML'2000 WORKSHOP DYNAMIC BEHAVIOUR IN UML MODELS: SEMANTIC QUESTIONS York - UK - October 2/3, 2000 http://www.disi.unige.it/person/ReggioG/UMLWORKSHOP/CALLFORPAPER.html WORKSHOP CONTACT Gianna Reggio (DISI-Universita' di Genova, Italy) firstname.lastname@example.org ORGANIZERS Gianna Reggio (DISI-Universita' di Genova, Italy) Alexander Knapp (Ludwig-Maximilians-Universitaet Munchen, Germany) Bernhard Rumpe (TU Munchen, Germany) Bran Selic (ObjecTime Ltd., Kanata, Canada) Roel Wieringa (University of Twente, The Netherlands) DEADLINES AND IMPORTANT DATES * Submission deadline: 28 July 2000 * Notification of Acceptance: 28 August 2000 * Workshop: 2 or 3 October 2000 CALL FOR PARTICIPATION Although many years of practical experience went into the design of the UML, the lack of precise semantics still stands in the way of effective application. The modelling of complex systems requires techniques that allow us to manage complexity as well as techniques that allow early detection of errors in behaviour models. UML well supports the principle of separation of views that is an effective means of controlling complexity. However, UML does not support so well the formality and rigour needed to early detect errors in requirements and design. Developing a precise, complete, and understandable semantics for the UML that enables practical, tool-supported and rigorous analysis of UML models can enhance its applicability to the modelling of complex systems. A formal analysis of the semantic foundations of the UML notations can also lead to more precise and complete natural language descriptions of the notations in the UML standard. In addition, the insights provided by a well-defined UML semantics can help modelers choose appropriately among a variety of modelling constructs. These observations are particularly relevant when we consider the dynamic behaviour of the UML models: - UML offers many different notations to represent dynamic behaviour, such as statechart diagrams, sequence diagrams, collaboration diagrams, and activity diagrams, and they are based on different paradigms/techniques. - dynamic behaviour is also modelled in other diagrams, not specifically intended for this; for example, in a class diagram we may have * invariants for active classes or for the whole model, * pre-post conditions on operations of active classes, * concurrency properties of operations, * signal reception specifications, * ........ - an aspect of the dynamic behaviour of a part of a system may be described simultaneously in several diagrams of a UML model, so that there is the need of developing methods, techniques and tools to help to avoid to introduce inconsistency in a model. - most of the semantic variation points in the UML are related to dynamic behaviour (for example, the policy for handling the event queue in statecharts). - ........ The purpose of this workshop is to bring together researchers and practitioners from academia and industry to report on their experiences with developing precise semantics for the dynamic behaviour of UML models. This one-day workshop will be the first on the particular topic of the semantics of the dynamic behaviour of the UML, but it ideally follows a series of successful four workshops on strengthening the UML semantic foundation organized at the OOPSLA and ECOOP conferences in the last two years, where this particular topic raised many questions and lively debate. Presentations and discussions at this workshop will focus on identifying the challenges, recognizing limitations, and analyzing proposed semantics for the dynamic aspects of UML. Attendance at the workshop will be on invitation only. Participants that would like to be invited are asked to write a position paper on some aspect of the dynamic behaviour of UML models. A nonexhaustive list of topics is - precise semantics of the "dynamic" diagrams, as statecharts, sequence, collaboration, and activity diagrams; and of the constraints over them; - precise semantics of UML models integrating the views presented by the different diagrams; - precise relationships among the different ways provided by UML to model some dynamic aspect of a system (for example equivalence between diagrams); - relationships between class diagrams and diagrams concerning the dynamic behaviour; - profiles covering dynamic aspects; - rigorous methods for modelling dynamic aspects of systems with UML exploiting proper ways to use the various diagrams; - motivations/proposals for UML extensions concerning the dynamic aspects (for example, extensions of OCL to allow to express many relevant constraints on the dynamic behaviour, as liveness); - translating one behaviour notation into another; - refinement and abstraction for behaviour models; - .......... According to the UML'2000 registration policy all attendees at the workshop will have to pay the workshop registration fee. A discounted fee will be offered for those also attending the <<UML>> 2000 conference. For more informations regarding the UML'2000 Conference and workshop registration please visit the conference web site at http://www.cs.york.ac.uk/uml2000/.