Skip to main content
Log in

An ontology-based framework for domain-specific modeling

Software & Systems Modeling Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Domain-specific languages (DSLs) provide abstractions and notations for better understanding and easier modeling of applications in a special domain. Current shortcomings of DSLs include learning curve and formal semantics. This paper reports on a framework that allows the use of ontology technologies to describe and reason on DSLs. The formal semantics of OWL together with reasoning services allows for addressing constraint definition, progressive evaluation, suggestions, and debugging. The approach integrates existing metamodels and concrete syntaxes in a new technical space. A scenario in which domain models for network devices are created illustrates the framework.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Kelly S., Tolvanen J.P.: Domain-Specific Modeling. Wiley, New York (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Gray, J., Fisher, K., Consel, C., Karsai, G., Mernik, M., Tolvanen, J.P.: Panel-DSLs: the good, the bad, and the ugly. In: OOPSLA Companion ’08. ACM, New York (2008)

  3. Langlois, B., Jitia, C.E., Jouenne, E.: DSL classification. In: OOPSLA 7th Workshop on Domain Specific Modeling (2007)

  4. Czarnecki, K.: Generative programming. PhD thesis, Department of Computer Science and Automation Technical University of Ilmenau (1998)

  5. Baader F., Calvanese D., McGuinness D., Nardi D., Patel-Schneider P.: The Description Logic Handbook: Theory, Implementation, and Applications. Cambridge University Press, New York (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Motik, B., Patel-Schneider, P.F., Horrocks, I.: OWL 2 Web Ontology Language: Structural Specification and Functional-Style Syntax. http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-syntax/ Accessed Oct 2009

  7. Tairas, R., Mernik, M., Gray, J.: Using ontologies in the domain analysis of domain-specific languages. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Transforming and Weaving Ontologies in Model Driven Engineering 2008. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 395. CEUR-WS.org (2008)

  8. Guizzardi, G., Pires, L.F., van Sinderen, M.: Ontology-based evaluation and design of domain-specific visual modeling languages. In: Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Information Systems Development. Springer, New York (2005)

  9. Bräuer, M., Lochmann, H.: An ontology for software models and its practical implications for semantic web reasoning. In: Proceedings of the 5th European Semantic Web Conference on The Semantic Web: Research and Applications. LNCS, vol. 5021, pp. 34–48. Springer, Berlin (2008)

  10. France, R.B., Rumpe, B.: Model-driven development of complex software: a research roadmap. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on the Future of Software Engineering (FOSE), pp. 37–54 (2007)

  11. Nuseibeh B., Easterbrook S., Russo A.: Leveraging inconsistency in software development. Softw. Dev. 33(4), 24–29 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Kurtev, I., Bézivin, J., Aksit, M.: Technological spaces: an initial appraisal. In: CoopIS, DOA’2002 Federated Conferences. Industrial track, Irvine (2002)

  13. Jouault, F., Bézivin, J.: KM3: a DSL for metamodel specification. In: Formal Methods for Open Object-Based Distributed Systems. LNCS, vol. 4037, 171–185. Springer, Berlin (2006)

  14. ATLAS Group LINA & INRIA, Nantes: KM3: Kernel MetaMetaModel, Manual version 0.3 (2005)

  15. Parreiras F.S., Staab S.: Using ontologies with UML class-based modeling: the TwoUse approach. Data Knowl. Eng. 69(11), 1194–1207 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Walter, T., Parreiras, F.S., Staab, S.: OntoDSL: an ontology-based framework for domain-specific languages. In: Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems, 12th International Conference, MODELS. LNCS, vol. 5795, pp. 408–422. Springer, Berlin (2009)

  17. Walter, T., Parreiras, F.S., Staab, S., Ebert, J.: Joint language and domain engineering. In: Proceedings of European Conference Modelling Foundations and Applications. LNCS, vol. 6138, pp. 321–336. Springer, Berlin (2010)

  18. Guarino, N., Oberle, D., Staab, S.: What is an ontology? Handbook on Ontologies, pp. 1–17 (2009)

  19. Miksa, K., Kasztelnik, M.: Definition of the case study requirements. Deliverable ICT216691/CMR/WP5-D1/D/PU/b1, Comarch (2008). MOST Project, http://www.most-project.eu/

  20. Farrugia, J.: Model-theoretic semantics for the web. In: WWW ’03: Proceedings of the 12th international conference on World Wide Web, New York, NY, USA, pp. 29–38. ACM, New York (2003)

  21. Motik, B., Patel-Schneider, P.F., Grau, B.C.: OWL 2 Web Ontology Language Direct Semantics. http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/REC-owl2-direct-semantics-20091027/. Accessed Oct 2009

  22. Horridge, M., Knublauch, H., Rector, A., Stevens, R., Wroe, C.: A practical guide to building OWL ontologies using the protégé-OWL plugin and CO-ODE tools. Technical report (2004)

  23. Donini F.M., Lenzerini M., Nardi D., Nutt W., Schaerf A.: An epistemic operator for description logics. Artif. Intell. 100(1–2), 225–274 (1996)

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  24. Grimm, S., Motik, B.: Closed world reasoning in the semantic web through epistemic operators. In: Proceedings of the 1st OWL Experiences and Directions Workshop (OWLED-2005). CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 188. CEUR-WS.org (2005)

  25. Sirin E., Parsia B., Grau B.C., Kalyanpur A., Katz Y.: Pellet: a practical OWL-DL Reasoner. Web Semantics: Sci. Services Agents World Wide Web 5(2), 51–53 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Harris, S., Seaborne, A.: SPARQL 1.1 Query Language. http://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-query/ Accessed June 2010

  27. Polleres, A.: SPARQL 1.1: new features and friends (OWL2, RIF). In: Web Reasoning and Rule Systems. LNCS, vol. 6333, pp. 23–26. Springer, Berlin (2010)

  28. Sirin, E., Parsia, B.: SPARQL-DL: SPARQL Query for OWL-DL. In: Proceedings of the 3rd OWL Experiences and Directions Workshop (OWLED-2007). CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 258. CEUR-WS.org (2007)

  29. Kremen, P., Sirin, E.: SPARQL-DL implementation experience. In: Proceedings of the 4th OWL Experiences and Directions DC Workshop (OWLED-DC-2008). CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 496. CEUR-WS.org (2008)

  30. Glimm, B., Parsia, B.: SPARQL 1.1 Entailment Regimes. http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-sparql11-entailment-20100126/ Accessed Jan 2010

  31. Schneider, M.: SPARQLAS—implementing SPARQL queries with OWL syntax. In: Proceedings of the 3rd Workshop on Transforming and Weaving Ontologies in Model Driven Engineering. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 604. CEUR-WS.org (2010)

  32. OMG: Meta Object Facility (MOF) Core Specification. Object Management Group (2006)

  33. Ebert, J., Riediger, V., Winter, A.: Graph technology in reverse engineering, the TGraph approach. In: Proceedings of Workshop Software Reengineering (WSR). LNI, vol. 126, pp. 67–81. GI (2008)

  34. Djuric D., Gasevic D., Devedzic V.: Ontology modeling and MDA. J. Object Technol. 4(1), 109–128 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Gaševic, D., Djuric, D., Devedzic, V., Damjanovic, V.: Approaching OWL and MDA through technological spaces. In: Proceedings of the 3rd Workshop in Software Model Engineering (WiSME 2004) (2004)

  36. Steinberg D., Budinsky F., Paternostro M., Merks E.: EMF: Eclipse Modeling Framework, 2nd edn. Addison-Wesley, New York (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Horridge, M., Patel-Schneider, P.F.: OWL 2 Web Ontology Language Manchester Syntax. http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-manchester-syntax Accessed Oct 2009

  38. Heidenreich, F., Johannes, J., Karol, S., Seifert, M., Wende., C.: Derivation and refinement of textual syntax for models. In: Proceedings of European Conference on Model-Driven Architecture Foundations and Applications. LNCS, vol. 5562, pp. 114–129. Springer, Berlin (2009)

  39. Van Der Straeten, R.: Inconsistency management in model-driven engineering. An approach using description logics. PhD thesis, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Belgium (2005)

  40. Finkelstein, A., Spanoudakis, G., Till, D.: Managing interference. In: ISAW ’96: Joint Proceedings of the Second International Software Architecture Workshop (ISAW-2) and International Workshop on Multiple Perspectives in Software Development (Viewpoints ’96) on SIGSOFT ’96 Workshops, pp. 172–174. ACM, New York (1996)

  41. Spanoudakis, G., Zisman, A.: Inconsistency management in software engineering: survey and open research issues. In: Handbook of Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering, vol. 1, pp. 329–380 (2001)

  42. Kalyanpur, A.: Debugging and repair of OWL ontologies. PhD thesis, University of Maryland, College Park (2006)

  43. Anastasakis, K., Bordbar, B., Georg, G., Ray, I.: UML2Alloy: a challenging model transformation. In: Proceedings of Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems, MoDELS 2007. LNCS, vol. 4735, pp. 436–450. Springer, Berlin (2007)

  44. Jackson D.: Software Abstractions: Logic, Language, and Analysis. The MIT Press, Cambridge (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  45. Wang H., Dong J., Sun J., Sun J.: Reasoning support for Semantic Web ontology family languages using alloy. Multiagent Grid Syst. 2(4), 455–471 (2006)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  46. Gerber, A., Lawley, M., Raymond, K., Steel, J., Wood, A.: Transformation: the missing link of MDA. In: Proceedings of 1st International Conference on Graph Transformation. LNCS, vol. 2505, pp. 90–105. Springer, Berlin (2002)

  47. Czarnecki, K., Kim, C.H.P.: Cardinality-based feature modeling and constraints: a progress report. In: Proceedings of International Workshop on Software Factories at OOPSLA’05 (2005)

  48. Czarnecki, K., Pietroszek, K.: Verifying feature-based model templates against well-formedness ocl constraints. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Generative Programming and Component Engineering, pp. 211–220. ACM, New York (2006)

  49. Warmer J., Kleppe A.: The Object Constraint Language: Getting Your Models Ready for MDA. Addison-Wesley, New York (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  50. White J., Schmidt D.C., Nechypurenko A., Wuchner E.: Model intelligence: an approach to modeling guidance. UPGRADE 9(2), 22–28 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  51. Mazanek, S., Minas, M.: Business process models as a showcase for syntax-based assistance in diagram editors. In: Proceedings of Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems (MoDELS). LNCS, vol. 5795, pp. 322–336. Springer, Berlin (2009)

  52. Mazanek, S., Maier, S., Minas, M.: Auto-completion for diagram editors based on graph grammars. In: Proceedings of IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computings, PP. 242–245. IEEE (2008)

  53. Berardi D., Calvanese D., Giacomo G.D.: Reasoning on UML class diagrams. Artif. Intell. 168(1–2), 70–118 (2005)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  54. Walter, T., Schwarz, H., Ren, Y.: Establishing a bridge from graph-based modeling languages to ontology languages. In: Proceedings of 3rd Workshop on Transforming and Weaving Ontologies in Model Driven Engineering (TWOMDE). Volume CEUR of 604. CEUR-WS.org (2010)

  55. Evans, A.S.: Reasoning with UML class diagrams. In: Proceedings of 2nd IEEE Workshop on Industrial Strength Formal Specification Techniques, pp. 102–113. IEEE Computer Society (1998)

  56. Ebert, J., Winter, A., Dahm, P., Franzke, A., Süttenbach, R.: Graph based modeling and implementation with EER/GRAL. In: Proceedings of Conceptual Modeling-ER’96. LNCS, vol. 1157, pp. 163–178. Springer, Berlin (1996)

  57. Haarslev, V., Möller, R.: Description of the racer system and its applications. In: Proceedings of Description Logics Workshop. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 49. CEUR-WS.org (2001)

  58. Bartho, A., Zivkovic, S.: Modeled software guidance/engineering processes and systems. Deliverable ICT216691/TUD/WP2-D2/D/PU/b1.00. Technial University Dresden, BOC (2009). MOST Project, http://www.most-project.eu/

  59. Miksa, K., Sabina, P., Zivkovic, S.: First demonstrator and report on experiences. Deliverable ICT216691/CMR/WP5-D3/D/PU/b1, Comarch (2010). MOST Project, http://www.most-project.eu/

  60. Miksa, K.: Evaluation of case study. Deliverable ICT216691/CMR/WP5-D4/D/RE/b1, Comarch (2011). MOST Project, http://www.most-project.eu/

  61. Kappel, G., Wimmer, M., Retschitzegger, W., Schwinger, W.: Leveraging model-based tool integration by conceptual modeling techniques. In: The Evolution of Conceptual Modeling. LNCS, vol. 6520, pp. 254–284. Springer, Berlin (2011)

  62. Kolovos, D.S., Paige, R.F., Polack, F.: Merging models with the epsilon merging language (EML). In: Proceedings of International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems (MoDELS). LNCS, vol. 4199, pp. 215–229. Springer, Berlin (2006)

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tobias Walter.

Additional information

Communicated by Dr. Jeff Gray, Juha-Pekka Tolvanen, and Matti Rossi.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Walter, T., Parreiras, F.S. & Staab, S. An ontology-based framework for domain-specific modeling. Softw Syst Model 13, 83–108 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-012-0249-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-012-0249-9

Keywords

Navigation