Protocol design and implementation using formal methods
The Computer Journal - Special issue on formal methods: part 1
A formal basis for architectural connection
ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology (TOSEM)
The Byzantine Generals Problem
ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems (TOPLAS)
Enterprise Application Integration: A Tech Brief
Enterprise Application Integration: A Tech Brief
An Event-Based Architecture Definition Language
IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
Distributed and Parallel Databases
Enterprise Integration Patterns: Designing, Building, and Deploying Messaging Solutions
Enterprise Integration Patterns: Designing, Building, and Deploying Messaging Solutions
Towards Advanced Interaction Design Concepts
EDOC '06 Proceedings of the 10th IEEE International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference
On Architectural Support For Behaviour Refinement In Distributed Systems Design
Journal of Integrated Design & Process Science
BPM'05 Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on Business Process Management
Extending profiles with stereotypes for composite concepts
MoDELS'05 Proceedings of the 8th international conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems
Hi-index | 0.00 |
This paper presents criteria for the adequacy of languages to represent interaction mechanisms. It then uses these criteria to analyse the adequacy of UML. We focus on the interaction mechanisms provided by Web Services technology and by CORBA for request/response, callback, polling and (multicast) message passing. We argue that the criteria for adequacy of a design language are that the language should: (1) be expressive enough to represent the mechanisms; (2) be easy to use when expressing them; (3) be platform independent in the sense that it does not force implementation decisions for a mechanism; and (4) behave corresponding to the mechanisms that it represents. We show that these criteria follow logically from the use of a design language in the design process. For UML we evaluate the first three criteria in a qualitative manner. To evaluate the fourth criteria, we present Coloured Petri Nets that capture the behaviour of both the mechanisms precisely and the UML constructs that represent them. Subsequently, we check the correspondence of their behaviour.