Release-to-release binary compatibility in SOM
Proceedings of the tenth annual conference on Object-oriented programming systems, languages, and applications
The WSLA Framework: Specifying and Monitoring Service Level Agreements for Web Services
Journal of Network and Systems Management
Concepts and Guidelines of Feature Modeling for Product Line Software Engineering
ICSR-7 Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Software Reuse: Methods, Techniques, and Tools
Modeling Web Services Variability with Feature Diagrams
Revised Papers from the NODe 2002 Web and Database-Related Workshops on Web, Web-Services, and Database Systems
Java(TM) Language Specification, The (3rd Edition) (Java (Addison-Wesley))
Java(TM) Language Specification, The (3rd Edition) (Java (Addison-Wesley))
Feature Diagrams and Logics: There and Back Again
SPLC '07 Proceedings of the 11th International Software Product Line Conference
Adaptable Web Services Modeling Using Variability Analysis
ICCIT '08 Proceedings of the 2008 Third International Conference on Convergence and Hybrid Information Technology - Volume 01
Automated reasoning on feature models
CAiSE'05 Proceedings of the 17th international conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering
A survey of automated web service composition methods
SWSWPC'04 Proceedings of the First international conference on Semantic Web Services and Web Process Composition
Feature models, grammars, and propositional formulas
SPLC'05 Proceedings of the 9th international conference on Software Product Lines
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
In general, components provide and require services and two components are bound if the first component provides a service required by the second component. However, certain variability in services – w.r.t. how and which functionality is provided or required – cannot be described using standard interface description languages. If this variability is relevant when selecting a matching component then human interaction is required to decide which components can be bound. We propose to use feature models for making this variability explicit and (re-)enabling automatic component binding. In our approach, feature models are one part of service specifications. This enables to declaratively specify which service variant is provided by a component. By referring to a service's variation points, a component that requires a specific service can list the requirements on the desired variant. Using these specifications, a component environment can then determine if a binding of the components exists that satisfies all requirements. The prototypical environment Columbus demonstrates the feasibility of the approach.