EVOLUTION MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK FOR

MULTI-DIMENSIONAL INFORMATION SYSTEMS

Nesrine Yahiaoui, Bruno Traverson

EDF R&D, 1 avenue du Général de Gaulle, F-92140 Clamart, France

Nicole Levy

UVSQ PRiSM,45 avenue des Etats-Unis, F-78035 Versailles, France

Keywords: Dynamic adaptation, Information Systems, RM-ODP, MDA.

Abstract: Information Systems (IS) have become key elements in enterprise activities and are now fully embedded

into business units. Productivity gained by this proximity is to be balanced with more strategic requirements

against the Information System. In particular, due to the proximity to business layers, adaptability property

of IS is more than ever required. The framework we have developed aims to keep synchronized multiple

descriptions of the same system in case of evolution. Its foundations are based on RM-ODP viewpoints and

meta-modelling technology. A prototype tool to support the framework has been developed as an

EMF/Eclipse plug-in.

1 INTRODUCTION

Information Systems (IS) have become key elements

in enterprise activities and are now fully embedded

into business units. Productivity gained by this

proximity is to be balanced with more strategic

requirements against the Information System. In

particular, due to the proximity to business layers,

adaptability property of IS is more than ever

required.

Now-a-days, many software architects tend to

agree that the design of sophisticated and distributed

applications has to be performed according to

different viewpoints (IEEE, 2000). This leads to

multi-dimensional systems where each dimension

describes a particular concern.

Evolution of multi-dimensional systems may

appear tricky if no links are maintained between the

various dimensions of the system. The purpose of

our framework is to manage these links and to use

them during evolution.

Part 2 gives the motivations of our work. Then,

part 3 and part 4 respectively focuses on

specification and implementation of the framework.

Part 5 looks at some related work and part 6

concludes the paper.

2 CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVES

As mentioned in the introduction, adaptation to

evolutions is critical for software-intensive systems.

This is the major motivation for our framework.

Also, our work has been based on two major

standards: RM-ODP (Reference Model of Open

Distributed Processing) standard (ISO/IEC, 1995)

and MDA (Model Driven Architecture) approach

(OMG, 2001).

This motivation section is broken up into three

parts: overview of RM-ODP standard, overview of

MDA approach and organization of our work.

2.1 RM-ODP Viewpoints

First of all, our framework is based on RM-ODP.

This standard recommends the separation of

stakeholders concerns using five viewpoints:

Enterprise, Information, Computation, Engineering

and Technology.

Identifying those viewpoints allows the system

specification to express at the same time but

distinctly the business the IS supports (Enterprise

Viewpoint), the way it is modelled in the computer

system regarding information and functions

331

Yahiaoui N., Traverson B. and Levy N. (2006).

EVOLUTION MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK FOR MULTI-DIMENSIONAL INFORMATION SYSTEMS.

In Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems - ISAS, pages 331-336

DOI: 10.5220/0002489803310336

 SciTePress

(Information Viewpoint, Computational Viewpoint,

Engineering Viewpoint) and the technical choices of

the computer system mapping user requirements

(Engineering Viewpoint, Technology Viewpoint).

The key points of RM-ODP are the completeness

of its concepts and structuring rules and the

relevance of its abstraction levels.

2.2 MDA

MDA is an approach recently promoted by OMG

(Object Management Group) which emphasizes the

use of models and meta-models. This approach

defines, on one hand, PIMs (Platform Independent

Models) to specify business aspects independently

from the development platform and, on the other

hand, PSMs (Platform Specific Models) which

describe the implementation of the IS on a specific

platform.

If the PSM is based on a programming language,

the transformation from PIM to PSM is called code

generation.

The transformation from a PIM to a PSM may be

based on a third kind of model called PDM

(Platform Description Model) which contains the

description of the platform the implementation

should be based on.

The transformation is, in this case, a model

transformation taking a PIM and a PDM as inputs

and producing a PSM as output.

The key points of the MDA approach are code

generation and model transformation, drastically

reducing the development costs.

2.3 Adaptation to Evolutions

RM-ODP standard provides the concepts to specify

the system. More recently, RM4ODP specification

(ISO/IEC, 2005) is proposing UML profiles to

express them. Besides, the separation into

viewpoints allows the designers to manage the

complexity of the development process, but there is

a need to maintain correctness and consistency of

the models during evolutions.

First of all, local consistency should be checked

when a model describing one viewpoint of the

system has changed: Are the constraints enforced by

this viewpoint still verified? Have we the ability to

go back and forth in the versions generated by the

various evolutions?

Then, impact on the global system should be

managed. Have the links between models been

updated? Has a change in a model to be reflected

into another model?

All these questions can only be answered by

knowing the exact history of every model and the

potentially complex relationships between models.

Our framework intends to help designers and

architects by offering support tools. As evolution

may be seen as model transformation, MDA

technology constitutes its core.

3 SPECIFICATION

The specification of our framework will be

presented in two parts. The first part will focus on

local consistency problem. The key point here is to

maintain the trace of all changes made on one

model. The second part will describe the linking

mechanisms that have been defined to handle global

consistency. Links are especially used for impact

management.

3.1 Modelling Evolution

Evolutions done on a model describing one

viewpoint of a system may be gathered in an

evolution scenario. This latter concept is defined as a

sequence of actions and gives a textual

representation of changes performed between two

versions of the model.

Of course, evolutions may be performed using a

graphical tool. But, this is always possible to

translate significant graphical events into a textual

representation. Moreover, the scenario permits to

keep track of successive evolutions and also to

analyse impacts of these evolutions.

Evolution scenarios are described using an action

language and stored in a repository. This facility

permits, for the designer, to explicitly manage them.

Also, it is associated to impact management process

that generates impact analyses that are written using

the same action language. An action may be either a

creation (Create), a modification (Modify), a

suppression (Delete) or a replacement (Replace).

3.2 Linking Viewpoints

This section will not provide meta-models for

viewpoints because they are given in UML4ODP

specification (ISO/IEC 2005). We will concentrate

on description of correspondence rules that are given

in part 3 of RM-ODP standard (ISO/IEC 1995) and

correspondence links that materialize the

ICEIS 2006 - INFORMATION SYSTEMS ANALYSIS AND SPECIFICATION

332

relationships between models based on different

viewpoints. Then, we will present the complete

meta-model.

3.2.1 Correspondence Rules

When an ODP system is fully described, models

representing each viewpoint should be available.

Also, designers should verify that they are

consistent. As we have already said earlier, two

consistency levels have to be considered.

Local consistency ensures that models are

described according to their respective meta-models

or viewpoints. Global consistency takes care of

dependencies between views. This later level is

based on correspondence rules. These rules describe

constraints on concepts from two distinct viewpoints

and concerned by a correspondence.

RM-ODP standard does not insist on mechanisms

to handle consistency between models based on two

different viewpoints. It only gives informally a set of

rules linking viewpoint concepts. These are some

rule examples also given in (Putman, 2001):

• Example of enterprise and computational

viewpoint correspondence: an enterprise object and

the role it assumes correspond to a computational

object or a configuration of computational objects.

• Example of enterprise and engineering viewpoint

correspondence: the enterprise policy corresponds to

and determines the engineering transparency

mechanisms and supporting engineering objects.

These rules describe correspondence between

concepts from two distinct viewpoints together with

their multiplicity. They should be formalized into an

executable language in order to enable verification.

This is under current work in our research team. But

we can give a flavour of it, for instance, on the

example of enterprise and computational viewpoint

correspondence given just before:

Correspondence rule:

Enterprise:EnterpriseObject[1] ÅÆ

Computational:ComputationalObject[1] OR

(Computational:ComputationalObjet[1..*]

AND

(Computational:PrimitiveBinding[1..*]

OR Computational:BindingObject[1..*]))

3.2.2 Correspondence Links

As shown in the previous section, correspondence

rules express consistency constraints between two

viewpoints. However, these rules are for general-

purpose and do not designate specific instances. In

other words, they do not give to the designer the

ability to navigate through models to learn real

relationships between model elements.

We propose correspondence links that introduce

traceability information between model elements by

linking elements belonging to distinct models.

Traceability is an important property for impact

management. Thus, the correspondence link permits

to know what model elements are to be checked

when there is an evolution.

3.2.3 Link Meta-Model

A correspondence link is established between model

elements belonging to models related to two distinct

viewpoints. It materializes a certain relationship

between these model elements. The correspondence

link should enforce correspondence rules expressed

between viewpoints concerned.

This link is bi-directional. It is possible to

navigate through it from any endpoint. Bi-

directionality enables to relax any constraint on

navigation through models of different viewpoints.

Any model may be modified. Then, it is possible to

retrieve correspondence of a model element in any

other models.

Moreover, links established between two models

may be of multiplicity of 1-*. Then, this should be

possible to link a model element related to one

viewpoint to one or more model elements related to

another viewpoint. Multiplicity restriction may

apply in a correspondence rule. We call this first

kind of correspondence rule a structural rule

(StucturalRule).

To manage impact of a model evolution on

another model, we introduce also the active rules

(ActiveRule). An active rule is directly associated to

a link. It permits to drive evolution of model

elements that are impacted due to correspondence

with another model. An active rule is composed of

three parameters: event, condition and action - also

called ECA (Event/Condition/Action) rule.

The global semantic of an active rule is « When an

event occurs, If the condition is satisfied Then action

is performed.

Event may be triggered by a modification made on a

model element. Condition is a predicate on the state

of the model element or on linked elements. Action

describes modifications to be applied on linked

elements. These modifications are expressed using

the action language already mentioned in section

3.1.

Thus, the Link Meta-Model is illustrated by

figure 1 where Endpoint designates each extremity

EVOLUTION MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK FOR MULTI-DIMENSIONAL INFORMATION SYSTEMS

333

of the correspondence link and LinkModel

aggregates all the correspondence links.

4 IMPLEMENTATION

Our architectural framework guides the designer in

his or her various activities that may be gathered into

three categories: description of models related to

viewpoints, establishment of correspondence links

and evolution of models. It is based on the link

meta-model and the meta-models representing ODP

viewpoints. Presently, we are working on the

enterprise and the computational viewpoints.

First of all, we describe the three categories of

activity, then the architecture and, finally, the

Eclipse plug-in.

4.1 Activities Supported

• Description of models related to ODP

viewpoints.

The designer is not constrained to follow a particular

approach to construct his or her multi-dimensional

system. The system may even be described by

several designers; each one can build a model in

accordance with their respective meta-model. The

models and their meta-models are persistent; they

are saved in repositories.

• Establishment of correspondence links.

Once all the models are completed, they are still

independent. To establish correspondences, the

designers have to link the models by using the link

meta-model. The correspondence links are thus

established between the models related to two

different viewpoints. These links memorise and keep

traces of the correspondence which can exist

between the models and may be used to guide the

evolution. The result of this activity is a link model

that is saved with its meta-model in the repositories.

• Evolution of models.

The designer can modify any model of his or her

multi-dimensional system. This evolution is either

described in an evolution scenario or directly

performed in a graphical way in the modelling tool.

Our modelling framework includes impact

management.

4.2 Architecture

This management is possible because our modelling

framework is based on the following architecture,

illustrated in figure 2.

The architecture consists of several modules

which collaborate. The designer writes the evolution

scenario thanks to the scenario descriptor module.

This module communicates with the Analyser

which verifies the syntax and semantic of the

scenario. The Local consistency controller verifies

that the model evolution respects the constraint

established by the respective meta-model. Once

local consistency is enforced, the scenario is applied

to the model by the Integrator. The Compiler, the

Local consistency controller and the Integrator

modules are included in the Evolution manager

product.

If model evolution has impact on other models,

the impact manager is triggered. This later builds the

impact scenario (similar to an evolution scenario). It

is mainly influenced by the applied evolution

Evolution

manager

Scenario

descriptor

Analyzer

Local

consistency

controller

Impact

manager

Integrator

Model

repository

Meta-model

repository

Link

model

repository

Impact

scenario

builder

Δx

manual

semi-

tti

automatic

Figure 2: Framework architecture.

Figure 1: Link Meta-Model.

ICEIS 2006 - INFORMATION SYSTEMS ANALYSIS AND SPECIFICATION

334

scenario and by the link model, especially on the

active rules which drive the construction of the

impact scenario. According to the adopted strategy,

the impact scenario builder may interact with three

different modules. These strategies are:

• Manual. The Impact scenario builder does not

build the relevant impact scenario. It gives to the

designer the list of model elements that must be

modified in the models according to the other

viewpoints. The designer will act on the other

models according to his or her knowledge of the

global system.

• Semi-automatic. The Impact scenario builder

communicates with the scenario descriptor to edit

the built scenario. This scenario is built from the

active rules. The designer can validate it and/or

improve it by adding or by modifying some actions.

• Automatic. The impact scenario builder

communicates with the Local consistency controller

to validate the constructed scenario. Then, the

impact scenario will be applied by the Integrator.

4.3 Eclipse Plug-in

Our modelling and impact management tool is

implemented as a plug-in in Eclipse EMF (Budinsky

et al, 2004, Eclipse, 2006)

Eclipse is an open and extensible framework based

on plug-in technology. It is dedicated for building

integrated development environments (IDEs) that

can be used to create applications as various as web

sites, embedded Java

programs, C++ programs.

EMF (Eclipse Modelling Framework) is a modelling

framework for Eclipse, it offers a reflective API to

manipulate the models and the meta-models which

are built using the Ecore meta-meta-model. EMF

can generate for each meta-model defined by Ecore

a tree editor, that allows the instantiation of elements

defined in a given meta-model.

To implement this tool, we supply two meta-models

corresponding to enterprise and computational

viewpoints.

Our plug-in uses other plug-ins, it uses EMF plug-in

but also the generated plug-ins from the enterprise,

computational, link and evolution scenario meta-

models. Our plug-in thus enables to create new

models: enterprise, computational and link. But also

offers a graphical menu called Evolution which

contains the following options:

• Textual editor. It opens a textual editor to write

the evolution scenario. This editor permits to save

and load a scenario.

• Graphic Editor. It opens a tree editor on a

specific model.

• Validate Local Consistency. It verifies that the

active model respects its meta-model.

• Validate Global Consistency. It verifies that the

active model was adapted; otherwise it activates an

order to the designer.

5 RELATED WORK

RM-ODP standard defines five viewpoints without

giving a precise notation to describe the

corresponding models. Furthermore, consistency

among models is not handled in detail. It only

describes some correspondence rules between

viewpoint concepts.

Several works have been done around the

formalization of viewpoints and the construction of

consistent ODP systems.

The ODAC project (Open Distributed

Applications Construction) (Gervais, 2003) carried

out by the LIP6 laboratory and the DASIBAO

project (Method based on ODP for the Architecture

of Information Systems) (Picault et al, 2004) carried

out by EDF R&D define, each one of both projects,

an approach for building consistent ODP systems.

The system is built in following steps and by

applying transformation rules to the models.

However, this consistency is lost if one of the

models is modified. On the other hand, they impose

a "top-down" approach which is not adapted when

we consider that the systems can evolve according to

any viewpoint.

Romeo's work (Romero et al, 2005) performed to

the university of Malaga in Spain is mainly around

the computational viewpoint. It describes a

computational meta-model and proposes a UML 2.0

profile which bridges the gap between ODP and

UML2.0 concepts. There are also works performed

in Japan (Hashimoto et al, 2005) which propose

UML 2.0 profiles for the of engineering and

technology viewpoints. These works are named

UML for ODP because it allows the designer to

model according to ODP semantic ODP by using

UML tools. However, they are not interested in the

consistency of the systems nor in their evolutions.

Dijkman’s work (Dijkman et al, 2004) performed

at the university of Twente in Netherlands is

interested to define and to verify consistency

relationships between the enterprise and

computational viewpoints. He uses a generic

framework to connect viewpoints and specifies

reusable consistency rules. This framework also uses

a basic viewpoint in which the two other viewpoints

can be transformed. That is, the enterprise view

EVOLUTION MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK FOR MULTI-DIMENSIONAL INFORMATION SYSTEMS

335

(respectively. Computational) that respects the

enterprise viewpoint (respectively. Computational)

is transformed into a basic ‘enterprise’ view

(respectively. Computational) that respects the basic

viewpoint. The enterprise and computational views

are consistent, if there is a abstraction relationship

between the computational basic view and the

enterprise basic view. However, this approach does

not exploit the correspondence rules quoted in the

standard which allows to put in relationships not

only the models but also the model elements.

Furthermore, this framework does not save the links

and the relationships which can exist between the

various model elements.

6 CONCLUSION

Models have long time been considered as a

“documentation and discussion” tool. Recently,

MDA initiative from the OMG consortium has

pushed models as a more active part in Information

Systems.

The framework, described in this paper,

constitutes a proposal to support MDA approach in

the specific case of multi-dimensional Information

Systems based on RM-ODP standard.

The main contributions in this work are the

specification of a Link Meta-Model and its

implementation as an Eclipse plug-in. The Link

Meta-Model goes beyond simple traceability

because it contains active rules that permit impact

management.

Short-term perspectives are to fully define the

language used to express structural rules, to cover all

the five viewpoints and to complete the

implementation in order to release it as an open

source.

Generalization of the framework to other kind of

multi-dimensional systems sounds possible and

could led us to compare our approach to other

general-purpose model transformation tools.

Another perspective is to use model weaving,

transposition of AOP (Aspect-Oriented

Programming) techniques on models to handle

evolution and impact management.

REFERENCES

Budinsky, F., Steinberg, D., Merks, E., Ellersick, R. and

Grose, T., 2004. Eclipse Modeling Framework.

Published by Addison Wesley Professionnal.

Dijkman, R. M., Quartel, D. A. C, Ferreira Pires L. and

van Sinderen M. J., 2004. A Rigorous Approach to

Relate Enterprise and Computational Viewpoints. In

Proceding of the 8th IEEE International Enterprise

Distributed Object Computing Conference (EDOC

2004), Monterey, California.

Eclipse project, 2006. http://www.eclipse.org/

Gervais, M. P., 2003. ODAC: An Agent-Oriented

Methodology Based on ODP. Journal of Autonomous

Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, Kluwer Academic

Publishers.

Hashimoto, D., Miyazaki, H. and Tanaka, A., 2005. UML

2.0 Models for ODP Engineering/Technology

Viewpoints. Workshop on ODP for Enterprise

Computing (WODPEC 2005), in conjunction with the

9th IEEE International Enterprise Distributed Object

Computing Conference (EDOC 2005). Enschede, The

Netherlands.

IEEE, 2000. IEEE Recommended practice for

architectural description of software-intensive system.

IEEE Std 1471–2000.

ISO/IEC, 2005. Information Technology Open Distributed

Processing. Use of UML for ODP system

specifications. Committee Draft.

ISO/IEC, 1995. Open Distributed Processing Reference

Model Part 1-4, ITU-T Spec. ITU-T 901..4 and

ISO/IEC Spec. ISO/IEC 10746-1..4.

OMG, 2001. Model Driven Architecture – Architecture

board ORMSC – document number ormsc/2001-07-01

– OMG-2001.

Picault, A., Bedu, P., Le Delliou, J., Perrin, J. and

Traverson, B., 2004. Specifying Information System

Architectures with DASIBAO - A standard based

method. 6

International Conference on Enterprise

Information Systems. Porto, Portugal.

Putman, J. R., 2001. Architecting with RM-ODP,

Prentice-Hall.

Romero, J. R. and Vallecillo, A.., 2005. Modelling the

ODP Computational Viewpoint with UML 2.0. In

Proceeding of the 9th IEEE International Enterprise

Distributed Object Computing Conference (EDOC

2005). Enschede, The Netherlands.

ICEIS 2006 - INFORMATION SYSTEMS ANALYSIS AND SPECIFICATION

336