now browsing by tag


Synthesis of MOF, MDA, PIM, MVC, and BCE Notations and Patterns

Exactly one year ago my first paper in US … (see lif­let)


Pub­lic­a­tions, includ­ing aca­dem­ic hand­books, con­tain numer­ous incon­sist­en­cies in the descrip­tions of applic­a­tions of archi­tec­tur­al meth­ods and pat­terns hid­den under the abbre­vi­ations such as MOF, MDA, PIM, MVC, BCE. An effi­cient ana­lys­is and the fol­low­ing soft­ware design, par­tic­u­larly when we are speak­ing of pro­jects real­ized in large teams, requires stand­ard­iz­a­tion of the pro­duc­tion pro­cess and the applied pat­terns and frame­works. This study attemp­ted to sort out the sys­tem of nota­tions describ­ing this pro­cess and used to describe archi­tec­tur­al pat­terns. Ana­lys­is of key notations—MOF and MDA, pat­terns MVC and BCE—was car­ried out, and a con­sist­ent sys­tem com­bin­ing them into a whole was created.Chapter Pre­view Top


In this study, Object Man­age­ment Group nota­tion sys­tems have been used. MOF (Meta Object Facil­ity) spe­cific­a­tion describes three abstrac­tion levels: M1, M2, M3 and level M0 that is real items (OMG MOF, 2016). M0 is a real sys­tem, M1 level is abstrac­tion of the items of this sys­tem (its mod­el). Level M2 com­prises of rela­tion­ships between classes of these objects (names of their sets) that is sys­tem metamod­el. M3 level is a meta-metamod­el describ­ing the mod­el­ing meth­od with the use of named ele­ments with spe­cified semantics and syntactic.

The ana­lys­is and design pro­cess is based on the MDA (Mod­el Driv­en Archi­tec­ture) spe­cific­a­tions. This pro­cess has three phases under­stood as cre­ation of sub­sequent mod­els: CIM (Com­pu­ta­tion Inde­pend­ent Mod­el), PIM (Plat­form Inde­pend­ent Mod­el), PSM (Plat­form Spe­cif­ic Mod­el) and code cre­ation phase. The CIM mod­el is doc­u­mented with the use of BPMN (Busi­ness Pro­cess Mod­el and Nota­tion) (OMG BPMN, 2013) and SBVR nota­tion (Semant­ic of Busi­ness Vocab­u­lary and Rules) (OMG SBVR, 2017). These are, respect­ively: busi­ness pro­cess mod­els and nota­tion mod­els and busi­ness rules. PIM and PSM mod­els are doc­u­mented with the use of UML nota­tion (Uni­fied Mod­el­ing Lan­guage) (OMG UML, 2017).

Between CIM and PIM mod­els, determ­in­a­tion of the list of applic­a­tion ser­vices (sys­tem reac­tions) occurs, whose real­iz­a­tion mech­an­ism is described by PIM mod­el. The stand­ard pat­tern used for mod­el­ing applic­a­tion archi­tec­ture is MVC pat­tern. Com­pon­ent Mod­el of this pat­tern is modeled with the use of the BCE archi­tec­tur­al pattern.

Semiotics vs. UML

Semi­ot­ics, as a sci­ence deal­ing with sym­bols and their mean­ings, provides us with the tool enabling determ­in­a­tion of rela­tion­ships between an object (thing), its name (expres­sion) and defin­i­tion of nota­tion rep­res­en­ted by the name (or sign, mean­ing). These rela­tion­ships are referred to as the semi­ot­ic tri­angle. Fig­ure 1 rep­res­ents this tri­angle on the left (OMG SBVR, 2017).

The UML nota­tion (OMG UML, 2017) oper­ates instance clas­si­fi­er and class nota­tions. To the right, Fig­ure 1 demon­strates an equi­val­ent to semi­ot­ic tri­angle expressed with those terms.

The UML nota­tion fur­ther oper­ates the gen­er­al struc­ture nota­tion, which is the con­tent of each cor­rect UML dia­gram. Struc­tures may express a con­cep­tu­al mod­el (Namespace) or mod­el (also metamod­el) of sys­tem archi­tec­ture (e.g. soft­ware) in the form of a chart (Archi­tec­ture).

Synthesis of MOF, MDA, PIM, MVC, and BCE Notations and Patterns

Jaroslaw Zel­in­ski (Inde­pend­ent Research­er)
Source Title: Applic­a­tions and Approaches to Object-Ori­ented Soft­ware Design: Emer­ging Research and Oppor­tun­it­iesCopy­right: © 2020 |Pages: 12DOI: 10.4018/978–1‑7998–2142‑7.ch003

Business continuity management – how to model it

Busi­ness Con­tinu­ity Man­age­ment (BCM) pro­jects are really dif­fi­cult . The main reas­on is the sys­tem com­plex­ity: many doc­u­ments, many tasks, many pro­cesses, many asso­ci­ations between all of them. Each task con­nec­ted to one or more busi­ness applic­a­tion. Each doc­u­ments stored in dif­fer­ent data­base. The applic­a­tions are integ­rated. Everything works like one chain … but one broken link can crash everything .

How we can man­aging risks? We can cre­ate Busi­ness Archi­tec­ture mod­el and expand this up to Enter­prise Archi­tec­ture, as a mod­el for trace pro­cess, data, IT sys­tem and infrastructure.

(source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enterprise_architecture_framework)

How we pre­pare Enter­prise Archi­tec­ture mod­el? Simple ver­sion: pre­pare busi­ness mod­el :

Trans­form this to use case mod­el (applic­a­tion ser­vices) :

Build mat­rix for trace map­ping con­trol :

Trace (map) use case to soft­ware com­pon­ents :

We have com­pleted mod­el, we can do impact ana­lys­is, e.g. what hap­pens and where, when the Ruter go down: 

Some­times we ask: what does the pos­sib­il­ity of car­ry­ing out the Pack­age Goods task depend on?

How can we do this and what tools do we need? Wel­come in my courses, hire me …


Kama, N., French, T., & Reyn­olds, M. (2011). Design Pat­terns Con­sid­er­a­tion in Class Inter­ac­tions Pre­dic­tion Devel­op­ment. Inter­na­tion­al Journ­al of Advanced Sci­ence and Tech­no­logy, 28, 21.
Poels, G., Gar­cía, F., Ruiz, F., & Piat­tini, M. (2020). Archi­tect­ing busi­ness pro­cess maps. Com­puter Sci­ence and Inform­a­tion Sys­tems, 17(1), 117–139. https://doi.org/10.2298/CSIS181118018P
Kacem, M. H., Jmaiel, M., Kacem, A. H., & Dri­ra, K. (2006). Trends in Enter­prise Applic­a­tion Archi­tec­ture. Lec­ture Notes in Com­puter Sci­ence, 158–171. https://www.academia.edu/2150818/An_UML-based_approach_for_validation_of_software_architecture_descriptions
McDavid, D. W. (1999). A stand­ard for busi­ness archi­tec­ture descrip­tion. IBM Sys­tems Journ­al, 38(1), 12–31. https://doi.org/10.1147/sj.381.0012
Gomes, S. B., San­toro, F. M., & Mira da Silva, M. (2020). An Onto­logy for BPM in Digit­al Trans­form­a­tion and Innov­a­tion: Inter­na­tion­al Journ­al of Inform­a­tion Sys­tem Mod­el­ing and Design, 11(2), 52–77. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJISMD.2020040103
Shishkov, B. (2020). Design­ing enter­prise inform­a­tion sys­tems mer­ging enter­prise mod­el­ing and soft­ware spe­cific­a­tion.
Hawryszkiewycz, I. T. (2012). Agile Busi­ness Sys­tem Design: Using Inform­a­tion Tech­no­logy to cre­ate busi­ness value (1 edi­tion). Vivid Publishing.