SpringerLink
Log in

Model-Driven Software Development

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Ontology-Driven Software Development

Abstract

Since ontology-driven software development (ODSD) is an integration of ontology technologies and model-driven software development (MDSD), it is necessary to identify and analyse technologies applied in MDSD. We define basic concepts, such as model-driven engineering, metamodelling, model transformation and technological space, and describe the state-of-the-art implementations of these concepts.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (Canada)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (Canada)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (Canada)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free ship** worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (Canada)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free ship** worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    http://www.ids-scheer.com/international/en

  2. 2.

    http://www.informatik.uni-hamburg.de/TGI/PetriNets/

  3. 3.

    http://www.yawl-system.com

  4. 4.

    http://www.bpmn.org

  5. 5.

    http://www.omg.org

References

  1. Y. Guo, Z. Pan, and J. Heflin, LUBM: A benchmark for OWL knowledge base systems. Web Semant. Sci. Serv. Agents World Wide Web 3(2–3), 158–182 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. N. Aizenbud-Reshef, B.T. Nolan, J. Rubin, Y. Shaham-Gafni, Model traceability. IBM Syst. J. 45(3), 515–526 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. N. Aizenbud-Reshef, R.F. Paige, J. Rubin, Y. Shaham-Gafni, D.S. Kolovos, Operational semantics for traceability. in ECMDA Traceability Workshop (ECMDA-TW) 2005 Proceedings, Nürnberg, 2005, pp. 7–14

    Google Scholar 

  4. B. Amann, M. Scholl, Gram: a graph data model and query language. in European Conference on Hypertext, 1992

    Google Scholar 

  5. G. Antoniol, G. Canfora, G. Casazza, A. De Lucia, E. Merlo, Recovering traceability links between code and documentation. IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 28(10), 970–983 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. L. Apostel, Towards the formal study of models in a non formal science. Synthese 12, 125–161 (1960)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. C. Atkinson, T. Kühne, Model-driven development: a metamodeling foundation. Software, IEEE, vol. 20(5), pp. 36–41 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  8. C. Atkinson, M. Gutheil, B. Kennel, A flexible infrastructure for multilevel language engineering. IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 99(RapidPosts), 742–755 (2009). ISSN 0098-5589. doi:http://doi.ieeecomputersociety.org/10.1109/TSE.2009.31

    Google Scholar 

  9. F. Baader, B. Suntisrivaraporn. Debugging SNOMED CT using axiom pinpointing in the description logic \({\mathcal{E}\mathcal{L}}^{+}\). in KR-MED’08, vol. 410, CEUR-WS, 2008

    Google Scholar 

  10. F. Baader, S. Brandt, C. Lutz, Pushing the \(\mathcal{E}\mathcal{L}\) envelope. in Proceedings of the 19th Joint International Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI 2005), 2005

    Google Scholar 

  11. F. Baader, D. Calvanese, D.L. McGuinness, D. Nardi, P.F. Patel-Schneider (eds.), The Description Logic Handbook: Theory, Implementation, and Applications (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2003). ISBN 0-521-78176-0

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. F. Baader, C. Lutz, B. Suntisrivaraporn, Is tractable reasoning in extensions of the description logic EL useful in practice? in Proceedings of the 2005 International Workshop on Methods for Modalities (M4M-05), 2005

    Google Scholar 

  13. F. Baader, R. Peñaloza, B. Suntisrivaraporn, Pinpointing in the description logic \(\mathcal{E}\mathcal{L}\). in Proceedings of the 2007 International Workshop on Description Logics (DL2007), CEUR-WS, 2007

    Google Scholar 

  14. T. Baar, The definition of transitive closure with OCL—limitations and applications. in Perspectives of System Informatics, ed. by M. Broy, A.V. Zamulin. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 2890 (Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, 2003), pp. 979–997. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-39866-0_36

  15. A. Bartho, Creating and maintaining tutorials with DEFT. in Proceedings of the 17th IEEE International Conference on Program Comprehension (ICPC’09), May 2009, pp. 309–310

    Google Scholar 

  16. A. Bartho, S. Zivkovic, D2.2—modeled software guidance/engineering processes and systems. Project Deliverable ICT216691/TUD/WP2-D2/D/PU/b1.00, MOST Project, February 2009

    Google Scholar 

  17. A. Bartho, H. Kühn, S. Tinella, W. Utz, S. Zivkovic, D2.1—requirements definition of ontology-driven software process guidance system. Project Deliverable ICT216691/BOC/WP2-D1/D/PU/b1.00, MOST Project, 2008

    Google Scholar 

  18. D. Batory, Feature models, grammars, and propositional formulas. Software Product Lines, 2005, pp. 7–20

    Google Scholar 

  19. B. Beckert, U. Keller, P.H. Schmitt, Translating the object constraint language into first-order predicate logic. in Proceedings of the Second Verification Workshop: VERIFY 2002, July 25–26, 2002, Copenhagen, Denmark, vol. 02–07, ed. by S. Autexier, H. Mantel. DIKU technical report, DIKU, 2002

    Google Scholar 

  20. D. Beckett (ed.), RDF/XML Syntax Specification (Revised), W3C Recommendation, 10 February 2004, http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-syntax-grammar-20040210/

  21. A. Berglund, S. Boag, D. Chamberlin, M.F. Fernández, M. Kay, J. Robie, J. Siméon (eds.), XML Path Language (XPath) 2.0 (Second Edition), W3C Recommendation 14 December 2010, http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/REC-xpath20-20101214/

  22. J. Bézivin, On the unification power of models. Software Syst. Model. 4(2), 171–188 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. J. Bézivin, O. Gerbe, Towards a precise definition of the OMG/MDA framework. In: Proceedings of the 16th IEEE International Conference on Automated Software Engineering, 2001, p. 273

    Google Scholar 

  24. J. Bézivin, I. Kurtev, Model-based Technology Integration with the Technical Space Concept, in Proceedings of the Metainformatics Symposium, Springer, 2005

    Google Scholar 

  25. J. Bézivin, F. Jouault, D. Touzet, An introduction to the atlas model management architecture. Research Report LINA, (05-01), 2005

    Google Scholar 

  26. D. Bildhauer, J. Ebert, V. Riediger, H. Schwarz, Using the TGraph approach for model fact repositories. in Proceedings of the Second International Workshop MoRSe 2008: Model Reuse Strategies—Can requirements drive reuse of software models? 2008, pp. 9–18

    Google Scholar 

  27. J. Bézivin, F. Jouault, I. Kurtev, P. Valduriez, Model-based DSL frameworks. in OOPSLA (ACM, New York, 2006), pp. 22–26

    Google Scholar 

  28. D. Bildhauer, T. Horn, V. Riediger, H. Schwarz, S. Strauß, grUML—A UML based modelling language for TGraphs. Technical report, University of Koblenz-Landau (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  29. B. Böhlen, Ein Parametrisierbares Graph-Datenbanksystem für Entwicklungswerkzeuge. (Shaker Verlag, Aachen, Germany, 2006)

    Google Scholar 

  30. H. Boley, G. Hallmark, M. Kifer, A. Paschke, A. Polleres, D. Reynolds (eds.), RIF Core Dialect, W3C Recommendation 22 June 2010. http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/REC-rif-core-20100622

  31. G. Boudol, Towards a lambda-calculus for concurrent and communicating systems. in TAPSOFT’89 (Springer, Berlin, 1989), pp. 149–161

    Google Scholar 

  32. R. Brcina, M. Riebisch, Defining a traceability link semantics for design decision support. In: ECMDA Traceability Workshop (ECMDA-TW) 2008 Proceedings, pp. 39–48. Sintef, Trondheim (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  33. S. Brockmans, P. Haase, P. Hitzler, R. Studer, A metamodel and UML profile for rule-extended OWL DL ontologies. in 3rd European Semantic Web Conference (ESWC). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4011 (Springer, Berlin, 2006), pp. 303–316

    Google Scholar 

  34. S. Brockmans, R. Volz, A. Eberhart, P. Löffler, Visual modeling of OWL DL ontologies using UML. in Proceedings of the Third International Semantic Web Conference, ed. by S. McIlraith et al. (Springer, Hiroshima, Japan, 2004), pp. 198–213

    Google Scholar 

  35. J. Broekstra, A. Kampman, F. van Harmelen, Sesame: a generic architecture for storing and querying RDF and RDF schema. in The Semantic Web—ISWC 2002, vol. 2342/2002, 2002, pp. 54–68. doi:10.1007/3-540-48005-6_7. http://www.openrdf.org/doc/papers/Sesame-ISWC2002.pdf

  36. A.D. Brucker, B. Wolff, A proposal for a formal ocl semantics in isabelle/hol. in TPHOLs ’02: Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Theorem Proving in Higher Order Logics (Springer, London, UK, 2002), pp. 99–114. ISBN 3-540-44039-9

    Google Scholar 

  37. A.D. Brucker, B. Wolff, The HOL-OCL book. Technical Report 525, ETH Zurich, 2006 http://www.brucker.ch/bibliography/abstract/brucker.ea-hol-ocl-book-2006

  38. T. Bruckhaus, N. Madhavii, I. Janssen, J. Henshaw, The impact of tools on software productivity. IEEE Software 13(5) (September 1996), Vol. 13(5), pp. 29–38

    Google Scholar 

  39. F. Budinsky, S. Brodsky, E. Merks, Eclipse Modeling Framework (Pearson, New Jersey, 2003)

    Google Scholar 

  40. C. Calero, F. Ruiz, M. Piattini, Ontologies for Software Engineering and Software Technology (Springer, Berlin, 2006)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  41. D. Calvanese, G. de Giacomo, D. Lembo, M. Lenzerini, R. Rosati, Tailoring owl for data intensive ontologies. in Proceedings of the 1st OWL: Experiences and Directions Workshop (OWL-ED 2005), 2005

    Google Scholar 

  42. D. Calvanese, G.D. Giacomo, D. Lembo, M. Lenzerini, R. Rosati, DL-Lite: Tractable description logics for ontologies. in Proceedings of AAAI 2005, 2005

    Google Scholar 

  43. D. Calvanese, G.D. Giacomo, M. Lenzerini, R. Rosati, G. Vetere, DL-Lite: Practical reasoning for rich DLs. in Proceedings of the DL2004 Workshop, 2004

    Google Scholar 

  44. P. Carlshamre, K. Sandahl, M. Lindvall, B. Regnell, J. Natt och Dag, An industrial survey of requirements interdependencies in software product release planning. in RE ’01: Proceedings of the Fifth IEEE International Symposium on Requirements Engineering, Toronto (IEEE Computer Society, USA, 2001)

    Google Scholar 

  45. J.J. Carroll, I. Dickinson, C. Dollin, D. Reynolds, A. Seaborne, K. Wilkinson, Jena: implementing the semantic web recommendations. Technical Report HPL-2003-146, Digital Media Systems Laboratory, HP Laboratories, Bristol, 2003. http://www.hpl.hp.com/techreports/2003/HPL-2003-146.pdf

  46. R. Charette, Software Engineering Environments: Concepts and Technology (Intertext Publications/McGraw-Hill, New York, 1986)

    Google Scholar 

  47. X. Chen, Extraction and visualization of traceability relationships between documents and source code. in Proceedings of the IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering, 2010, pp. 505–510

    Google Scholar 

  48. J. Cleland-Huang, C.K. Chang, M. Christensen, Event-based traceability for managing evolutionary change. IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 29(9), 796–810 (2003). doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TSE.2003.1232285

    Google Scholar 

  49. P. Constantopoulos, M. Jarke, J. Mylopoulos, Y. Vassiliou, The software information base: a server for reuse. VLDB J. 4(1), 1–43 (1995). ISSN 1066-8888. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01232471

    Google Scholar 

  50. G. Cysneiros, A. Zisman, Traceability and completeness checking for agent-oriented systems. in Proceedings of the 2008 ACM Symposium on Applied Computing (SAC ’08) (ACM, New York, 2008), pp. 71–77. doi:http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1363686.1363706

  51. K. Czarnecki, Generative Programming: Principles and Techniques of Software Engineering Based on Automated Configuration and Fragment-Based Componet Models, Ph.D. thesis, Technical University of Ilmenau, 1998

    Google Scholar 

  52. K. Czarnecki, C. Kim, Cardinality-based feature modeling and constraints: a progress report. in International Workshop on Software Factories, Citeseer, 2005

    Google Scholar 

  53. K. Czarnecki, S. Helsen, U. Eisenecker, Formalizing cardinality-based feature models and their specialization. Software Process. Improv. Pract. 10(1), 7–29 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Å.G. Dahlstedt, A. Persson, Requirements interdependencies—moulding the state of research into a research agenda. in Requirements Engineering Forum on Software Quality (REFSQ), Klagenfurt/Velden, 2003, pp. 71–80

    Google Scholar 

  55. C.V. Damásio, A. Analyti, G. Antoniou, G. Wagner, Supporting open and closed world reasoning on the web. in Proceedings of 4th Workshop on Principles and Practice of Semantic Web Reasoning, Budva, Montenegro (10–11 June 2006), Lecture Notes in Computer Science REWERSE, 2006, pp. 149–163

    Google Scholar 

  56. A. De Lucia, R. Oliveto, G. Tortora, ADAMS re-trace: traceability link recovery via latent semantic indexing. in Proceedings of the 30th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE ’08) (ACM, New York, NY, USA, 2008), pp. 839–842. doi:http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1368088.1368216

  57. J. Dick, Rich traceability. in Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Traceability in Emerging Forms of Software Engineering, Edinburgh, 2002

    Google Scholar 

  58. F.M. Donini, D. Nardi, R. Rosati, Description logics of minimal knowledge and negation as failure. ACM Trans. Comput. Log. 3(2), 177–225 (2002)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  59. N. Drivalos, D.S. Kolovos, R.F. Paige, K.J. Fernandes, Engineering a DSL for software traceability. in Software Language Engineering: First International Conference, SLE 2008, Toulouse, France, September 29–30, 2008. Revised Selected Papers, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2008, pp. 151–167

    Google Scholar 

  60. N. Drivalos-Matragkas, D.S. Kolovos, R.F. Paige, K.J. Fernandes, A state-based approach to traceability maintenance. in Proceedings of the 6th ECMFA Traceability Workshop 2010 (ECMFA-TW), ed. by J. Oldevik, G.K. Olsen, D.S. Kolovos, 2010, pp. 23–30

    Google Scholar 

  61. J. Ebert, D. Bildhauer, Reverse Engineering Using Graph Queries. In: Andy Schürr, Claus Lewerentz, Gregor Engels, Wilhelm Schäfer, Bernhard Westfechtel: Graph Transformations and Model Driven Engineering. 335–362, Springer Verlag. 2010

    Google Scholar 

  62. J. Ebert, A. Franzke, A declarative approach to graph based modeling. in Graphtheoretic Concepts in Computer Science, ed. by E. Mayr, G. Schmidt, G. Tinhofer, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 903 (Springer, Berlin, 1995), pp. 38–50.

    Google Scholar 

  63. J. Ebert, V. Riediger, A. Winter, Graph technology in reverse engineering, the TGraph approach. in Proceedings of the 10th Workshop Software Reengineering (WSR 2008), ed. by R. Gimnich, U. Kaiser, J. Quante, A. Winter. GI Lecture Notes in Informatics, vol. 126, pp. 67–81 GI, Bonn, 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  64. J. Ebert, R. Süttenbach, I. Uhe, Meta-CASE in practice: a case for KOGGE. in Advanced Information Systems Engineering (Springer, Berlin, 1997), pp. 203–216

    Google Scholar 

  65. J. Ebert, B. Kullbach, V. Riediger, A. Winter, GUPRO. Generic understanding of programs—an overview. Electr. Notes Theor. Comput. Sci. 72(2) (2002), pp. 47–56

    Google Scholar 

  66. A. Espinoza, P.P. Alarcón, J. Garbajosa, Analyzing and systematizing current traceability schemas. in SEW ’06: 30th Annual IEEE/NASA Software Engineering Workshop SEW-30, 2006, pp. 21–32. doi:http://doi.ieeecomputersociety.org/10.1109/SEW.2006.12

  67. J.-M. Favre, T. Nguyen, Towards a megamodel to model software evolution through transformations. Electr. Notes Theor. Comput. Sci. 127(3), 59–74 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. D. Firesmith, Are your requirements complete? J. Object Tech. 4(1), 27–44 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. J.J. Fleck, Overview of the Structure of the NGOSS Architecture. White paper (Hewlett-Packard Company, Palo Alto, May 2003)

    Google Scholar 

  70. D. Forum, DSM forum web page, 2010. http://www.dsmforum.org/

  71. M. Fowler, Language workbenches: the killer-app for domain specific languages? Online Web Page, http://martinfowler.com/articles/languageWorkbench.html, 2005

  72. A. Friesen, J. Lemcke, D. Oberle, T. Rahmani, D6.1—description of functional and non-functional requirements. Project Deliverable ICT216691/SAP/WP6-D1/D/PU/b1, MOST Project, 2008

    Google Scholar 

  73. A. Friesen, J. Lemcke, D. Oberle, T. Rahmani, D6.2—case studies design. Project Deliverable ICT216691/SAP/WP6-D2/D/RE/b1, MOST Project, 2009

    Google Scholar 

  74. E. Gamma, R. Helm, R. Johnson, J. Vlissides, Design Patterns: Elements Of Reusable Object-Oriented Software (Addison-Wesley, Boston, MA, 1995)

    Google Scholar 

  75. A. Goknil, I. Kurtev, K. van den Berg, Change impact analysis based on formalization of trace relations for requirements. in ECMDA Traceability Workshop (ECMDA-TW) 2008 Proceedings, ed. by J. Oldevik, G.K. Olsen, T. Neple, R. Paige, 2008, pp. 59–75

    Google Scholar 

  76. A. Goknil, I. Kurtev, K. van den Berg, J.-W. Veldhuis, Semantics of trace relations in requirements models for consistency checking and inferencing. Software Syst. Model. December 2009. doi:10.1007/s10270-009-0142-3. Available online at http://springerlink.metapress.com/link.asp?id=109378

  77. B.C. Grau, A possible simplification of the semantic web architecture. in Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on World Wide Web, WWW 2004, New York, NY, USA, May 17–20, 2004 (ACM, New York, 2004), pp. 704–713

    Google Scholar 

  78. B.C. Grau, B. Motik, Z. Wu, A. Fokoue, C. Lutz, Owl 2 web ontology language tractable fragments. W3C Working Draft, 11 April 2008. Available at http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Tractable_Fragments. Accessed 14 June 2008

  79. M. Grechanik, K.S. McKinley, D.E. Perry, Recovering and Using Use-Case-Diagram-To-Source-Code Traceability Links. in ESEC-FSE ’07: Proceedings of the 6th Joint Meeting of the European Software Engineering Conference and the ACM SIGSOFT Symposium on The Foundations of Software Engineering, 2007

    Google Scholar 

  80. J. Greenfield, K. Short, Software Factories: Assembling Applications with Patterns, Models, Frameworks and Tools, 1st edn. (Wiley, Indiana, 2004)

    Google Scholar 

  81. S. Grimm, B. Motik, Closed world reasoning in the semantic web through epistemic operators. in OWLED Workshop on OWL: Experiences and Directions, CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 188. CEUR-WS.org, 2005

    Google Scholar 

  82. G. Groener, S. Staab, Modeling and query pattern for process retrieval in OWL. in Proceedings of 8th International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5823 (Springer, Berlin, 2009), pp. 243–259

    Google Scholar 

  83. P. Groot, H. Stuckenschmidt, H. Wache, Approximating description logic classification for semantic web reasoning. in Proceedings of ESWC2005, 2005

    Google Scholar 

  84. G.M. Gwyner, J. Lee, Defining specialization for process models. Technical report, Boston University School of Management, 1995

    Google Scholar 

  85. V. Haarslev, R. Moller, M. Wessel, Querying the semantic web with racer + nRQL. in Proceedings of the KI-04 Workshop on Applications of Description Logics, 2004

    Google Scholar 

  86. P. Haase, G. Qi, An Analysis of Approaches to Resolving Inconsistencies in DL-based Ontologies, in Proceedings of International Workshop on Ontology Dynamics (IWOD’07), Innsbruck, Austria, 2007

    Google Scholar 

  87. T. Hall, S. Beecham, A. Rainer, Requirements problems in twelve software companies: An empirical analysis. IEE Proc. Software 149(5), 153–160 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  88. H. Happel, S. Seedorf, Applications of ontologies in software engineering. Workshop on Sematic-Web Enabled Software Engineering (SWESE), 2006

    Google Scholar 

  89. H. He, A.K. Singh, Graphs-at-a-time: query language and access methods for graph databases. in Proceedings of the 2008 International Conference on Management of Data (SIGMOD ’08) (ACM, New York, 2008), pp. 405–418. ISBN 978-1-60558-102-6

    Google Scholar 

  90. F. Heidenreich, Towards systematic ensuring well-formedness of software product lines. 1st Workshop on Feature-Oriented Software Development, 2009

    Google Scholar 

  91. F. Heidenreich, J. Kopcsek, C. Wende, FeatureMapper: map** features to models. 30th International Conference on Software Engineering, 2008

    Google Scholar 

  92. F. Heidenreich, J. Johannes, S. Karol, M. Seifert, C. Wende, Derivation and refinement of textual syntax for models. in Model Driven Architecture-Foundations and Applications, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5562 (Springer, Berlin, 2009), pp. 114–129

    Google Scholar 

  93. B. Henderson-Sellers, C. Gonzalez-Perez, A comparison of four process metamodels and the creation of a new generic standard. Inform. Software Tech. 47(1), 49–65 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  94. P. Hitzler, D. Vrandecic, Resolution-based approximate reasoning for OWL DL. in Proceedings of the 4th International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC2005), 2005

    Google Scholar 

  95. D.A. Holland, PQL language guide and reference. Web document, Harvard School of Engineering and Applied Sciences, 2009. http://www.eecs.harvard.edu/syrah/pql/docs/guide.pdf

  96. T. Horn, J. Ebert, The GReTL transformation language. ICMT 183–197 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  97. M. Horridge, N. Drummond, J. Goodwin, A.L. Rector, R. Stevens, H. Wang, The manchester owl syntax. in OWLED, ed. by B.C. Grau, P. Hitzler, C. Shankey, E. Wallace, B.C. Grau, P. Hitzler, C. Shankey, E. Wallace. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 216. CEUR-WS.org, 2006

    Google Scholar 

  98. I. Horrocks, P. Patel-Schneider, Reducing OWL entailment to description logic satisfiability. J. Web Semant. 1(4), 345–357 (2004). ISSN 1570-8268.

    Google Scholar 

  99. I. Horrocks, O. Kutz, U. Sattler, The even more irresistible sroiq. in Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR 2006) (AAAI Press, USA, 2006), pp. 57–67

    Google Scholar 

  100. I. Horrocks, P.F. Patel-Schneider, H. Boley, S. Tabet, B. Grosof, M. Dean, SWRL: A Semantic Web Rule Language Combining OWL and RuleML, W3C Member Submission 21 May 2004. http://www.w3.org/Submission/2004/SUBM-SWRL-20040521, 2004.

  101. J. Huffman Hayes, A. Dekhtyar, S.K. Sundaram, Advancing candidate link generation for requirements tracing: the study of methods. IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 32(1), 4–19 (2006). doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TSE.2006.3

    Google Scholar 

  102. C. Hurtado, A. Poulovassilis, P. Wood, A relaxed approach to RDF querying. in Proceedings of the 5th International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC-2006), 2006

    Google Scholar 

  103. U. Hustadt, B. Motik, U. Sattler, Reducing \({\mathcal{S}\mathcal{H}\mathcal{I}\mathcal{Q}}^{-}\) description logic to disjunctive datalog programs. in Proceedings of KR2004, 2004, pp. 152–162

    Google Scholar 

  104. M. Jarke, Requirements tracing. Comm. ACM 41(12), 32–36 (1998). doi:http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/290133.290145

  105. W. Jirapanthong, A. Zisman, XTraQue: traceability for product line systems. Software Syst. Model. 8(1), 117–144 (2009). doi:10.1007/s10270-007-0066-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  106. F. Jouault, Loosely coupled traceability for ATL. in ECMDA Traceability Workshop (ECMDA-TW) 2005 Proceedings, Nürnberg (2005), pp. 29–37

    Google Scholar 

  107. F. Jouault, J. Bézivin, Km3: a dsl for metamodel specification, in Proceedings of 8th FMOODS. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4037 (Springer, Berlin, 2006), pp. 171–185

    Google Scholar 

  108. F. Jouault, F. Allilaire, J. Bézivin, I. Kurtev, ATL: A model transformation tool. Sci. Comput. Program. 72(1–2), 31–39 (2008)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  109. H. Kaindl, The missing link in requirements engineering. SIGSOFT Software Eng. Notes 18(2), 30–39 (1993). doi:http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/159420.155836

  110. A. Kalyanpur, Debugging and repair of OWL ontologies. Ph.D. thesis, University of Maryland, College Park, 2006

    Google Scholar 

  111. A. Kalyanpur, B. Parsia, M. Horridge, E. Sirin, Finding all justifications of OWL DL entailments. Lecture Notes Comput. Sci. 4825, 267 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  112. A. Kalyanpur, B. Parsia, E. Sirin, B. Cuenca-Grau, Repairing unsatisfiable concepts in OWL ontologies. The Semantic Web: Research and Applications, 2006, pp. 170–184

    Google Scholar 

  113. A. Kalyanpur, B. Parsia, E. Sirin, J. Hendler, Debugging unsatisfiable classes in OWL ontologies. Web Semant. Sci. Serv. Agents World Wide Web 3(4), 268–293 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  114. K. Kang, S. Cohen, J. Hess, W. Nowak, S. Peterson, Feature-oriented domain analysis (FODA) feasibility study. Technical Report CMU/SEI-90-TR-21, Software Engineering Institute, Pittsburgh, PA, 1990

    Google Scholar 

  115. M. Kasztelnik, K.M. Miksa, P. Sabina, D5.2—case study design. Project Deliverable ICT216691/CMR/WP5-D2/D/RE/b1, MOST Project, February 2009

    Google Scholar 

  116. S. Kelly, J. Tolvanen, Domain-Specific Modeling: Enabling Full Code Generation (Wiley-IEEE Computer Society Press, New York, 2008)

    Google Scholar 

  117. S. Kent, Model driven engineering, in Proceedings of Third International Conference on Integrated Formal Methods, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 2335 (Springer, Berlin, 2002), pp. 286–298

    Google Scholar 

  118. N. Kiesel, A. Schürr, B. Westfechtel, GRAS, a graph oriented (software) engineering database system. Information Systems 20(1), 21–51 (1995). ISSN 0306-4379. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0306-4379(95)00002-L

  119. A.G. Kleppe, J.B. Warmer, W. Bast, MDA Explained, The Model Driven Architecture: Practice and Promise (Addison-Wesley, Boston, 2002)

    Google Scholar 

  120. H. Knublauch, R. Fergerson, N. Noy, M. Musen. The Protégé OWL plugin: An open development environment for semantic web applications. In ISWC-2004, Lecture notes in computer science, 2004, Vol. 3298, pp. 229–243

    Google Scholar 

  121. M. Krötzsch, S. Rudolph, P. Hitzler, Conjunctive queries for a tractable fragment of owl 1.1, in ISWC/ASWC, 2007, pp. 310–323

    Google Scholar 

  122. B. Kullbach, A. Winter, Querying as an enabling technology in software reengineering, in Proceedings of the 3rd Euromicro Conference on Software Maintenance & Reengineering, ed. by C. Verhoef, P. Nesi (IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos, 1999), pp. 42–50. http://www.uni-koblenz.de/~ist/documents/Kullbach1999QAA.pdf http://www.uni-koblenz.de/~ist/documents/Kullbach1999QAA.pdf

  123. B. Liskov, Data abstraction and hierarchy, in OOPSLA ’87: Addendum to the Proceedings on Object-Oriented Programming Systems, Languages and Applications (Addendum) (ACM, New York, 1987), pp. 17–34. ISBN 0-89791-266-7. doi:http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/62138.62141

  124. P. Mäder, O. Gotel, I. Philippow, Rule-based maintenance of post-requirements traceability relations, in Proceedings of the 16th IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference, 2008, pp. 23–32

    Google Scholar 

  125. J.I. Maletic, M.L. Collard, TQL: A query language to support traceability, in Proceedings of 5th ACM International Workshop on Traceability in Emerging Forms of Software Engineering (TEFSE’09), Vancouver, BC, Canada, May 18 (2009), pp. 16–20

    Google Scholar 

  126. J.I. Maletic, M.L. Collard, B. Simoes, An XML based approach to support the evolution of model-to-model traceability links, in Proceedings of 3rd International Workshop on Traceability in Emerging Forms of Software Engineering, Long Beach, 2005, pp. 67–72

    Google Scholar 

  127. J.I. Maletic, E.V. Munson, A. Marcus, T.N. Nguyen, Using a hypertext model for traceability link conformance analysis, in Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Traceability in Emerging Forms of Software Engineering, Montreal, 2003

    Google Scholar 

  128. M. Mannion, B. Keepence, Smart requirements. ACM Software Eng. Notes 20, 42 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  129. D.L. McGuinness, F. van Harmelen, Owl web ontology language overview. W3C Working Draft, 10 February 2004

    Google Scholar 

  130. K. Mehlhorn, S. Näher, C. Uhrig, The LEDA platform of combinatorial and geometric computing, in Proceedings of the 24th International Colloquium on Automata, Languages and Programming (ICALP ’97), 1997, pp. 7–16. ISBN 3-540-63165-8

    Google Scholar 

  131. K. Miksa, M. Kasztelnik, D5.1—definition of the case study requirements. Project Deliverable ICT216691/CMR/WP5-D1/D/PU/b1, MOST Project, September 2008

    Google Scholar 

  132. K. Miksa, M. Kasztelnik, P. Sabina, T. Walter, Towards semantic modelling of network physical devices, in Models in Software Engineering, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 6002 (Springer, Berlin, 2010), pp. 329–343

    Google Scholar 

  133. J. Miller, J. Mukerji, Mda guide version 1.0.1. Technical report, OMG, 2003

    Google Scholar 

  134. R. Milner, A Calculus of Communicating Systems, Springer Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Springer, Berlin, 1980)

    Google Scholar 

  135. R. Milner, Communication and Concurrency (Prentice Hall, New Jersey, 1989)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  136. R. Milner, J. Parrow, D. Walker, A calculus of mobile processes, I Inform. Comput. 100(1), 1–40 (1992)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  137. M. Moon, H.S. Chae, T. Nam, K. Yeom, A metamodeling approach to tracing variability between requirements and architecture in software product lines, in Proceedings of the 7th IEEE International Conference on Computer and Information Technology (IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, 2007), pp. 927–933

    Google Scholar 

  138. B. Motik, On the properties of metamodeling in OWL. J. Log. Comput. 17(4), 617–637 (2007)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  139. B. Motik, B.C. Grau, I. Horrocks, Z. Wu, A. Fokoue, C. Lutz, Owl 2 web ontology language profiles. W3C Recommendation, 27 October 2009. Available at http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-profiles/

  140. B. Motik, P.F. Patel-Schneider, I. Horrocks, OWL 2 Web Ontology Language—Structural Specification and Functional-Style Syntax. Working draft, W3C, April 2008

    Google Scholar 

  141. M. Nagl, An incremental compiler as component of a system for software generation, in Programmiersprachen und Programmentwicklung, 6. Fachtagung des Fachausschusses Programmiersprachen der GI (Springer, London, UK, 1980), pp. 29–44

    Google Scholar 

  142. T.N. Nguyen, E.V. Munson, A model for conformance analysis of software documents, in Proceedings of the 6th International Workshop on Principles of Software Evolution (IWPSE), 2003

    Google Scholar 

  143. K. Nørmark, Elucidative programming. Nord. J. Comput. 7(2):87–105 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  144. I. Ober, A. Prinz, What do we need metamodels for? in Proceedings of the 4th Nordic Workshop on UML and Software Modelling (NWUML’06), Norway, 2006

    Google Scholar 

  145. OMG, Business Process Modeling Notation (BPMN), Version 1.2, Object Management Group, 2009

    Google Scholar 

  146. G.K. Olsen, J. Oldevik, Scenarios of traceability in model to text transformations, in Proceedings of the 3rd European Conference on Model-Driven Architecture—Foundation and Applications (ECMDA-FA 2007), ed. by D.H. Akehurst, R. Vogel, R.F. Paige, 2007

    Google Scholar 

  147. OMG. MOF QVT Final Adopted Specification, Object Management Group, 2005. http://www.omg.org/docs/ptc/05-11-01.pdf

  148. OMG. Object Constraint Language Specification, version 2.0. Object Modeling Group, 2005. http://fparreiras/specs/OCLSpec06-05-01.pdf

  149. OMG. Meta Object Facility (MOF) Core Specification. Object Management Group, 2006

    Google Scholar 

  150. OMG. Ontology Definition Metamodel. Object Modeling Group 2007

    Google Scholar 

  151. OMG. Unified Modeling Language: Superstructure, version 2.1.2. Object Modeling Group, 2007. http://fparreiras/specs/UML2.1.1.formal07-02-03.pdf

  152. OMG. Software Process Engineering Metamodel (spem) Specification—Version 2.0 Object Management Group, 2008. http://www.omg.org/docs/formal/08-04-01.pdf

  153. OMG, OMG Unified Modeling Language (OMG UML) Infrastructure. Version 2.2, Object Management Group, 2009. http://www.omg.org/spec/UML/2.2/Infrastructure

  154. OMG. Unified Modeling LanguageTM, OMG Available Specification, Version 2.2. Object Management Group (OMG), 2009. http://www.omg.org/spec/UML/2.2/

  155. J.Z. Pan, I. Horrocks, RDFS(FA) and RDF MT: two semantics for RDFS, in Proceedings of the 2nd International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC2003), 2003

    Google Scholar 

  156. J.Z. Pan, E. Thomas, Approximating OWL-DL ontologies, in AAAI-2007, 2007, pp. 1434–1439

    Google Scholar 

  157. J.Z. Pan, I. Horrocks, G. Schreiber, OWL FA: A metamodeling extension of OWL DL, in Proceedings of the First International OWL Experience and Directions Workshop (OWLED-2005), 2005

    Google Scholar 

  158. F.S. Parreiras, S. Staab, Using ontologies with uml class-based modeling: The twouse approach. Data Knowl. Eng. 69(11), 1194–1207 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  159. F.S. Parreiras, T. Walter, C. Wende, D1.3—report on transformation patterns. Project Deliverable ICT216691/UoKL/WP1-D3/D/PU/a1, MOST Project, (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  160. P.F. Patel-Schneider, B. Motik, (eds.), OWL 2 Web Ontology Language Map** to RDF Graphs, W3C Recommendation 27 October 2009, http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/REC-owl2-map**-to-rdf-20091027

  161. B. Pierce, in Foundational Calculi for Programming Languages, ed. by A.B. Tucker. Handbook of Computer Science and Engineering, chapter 139 (CRC Press, Boca Raton, 1996), pp. 2190–2207

    Google Scholar 

  162. F.A. Pinheiro, An object-oriented library for tracing requirements. in Anais do WER99—Workshop em Engenharia de Requisitos, Buenos Aires, 1999

    Google Scholar 

  163. F.A. Pinheiro, Requirements traceability, in Perspectives on Software Requirements, chapter 5, ed. by J.C. Sampaio do Prado Leite, J.H. Doorn (Kluwer Academic, New York, 2003), pp. 91–113

    Google Scholar 

  164. K. Pohl, Process-Centered Requirements Engineering. Advanced Software Development Series (Research Studies Press, Taunton, Somerset, England, 1996)

    Google Scholar 

  165. K. Pohl, G. Böckle, F. Van Der Linden, Software Product Line Engineering: Foundations, Principles, and Techniques (Springer, Berlin, 2005). ISBN 978-3540243724

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  166. A. Polleres, F. Scharffe, R. Schindlauer, Sparql +  + for map** between rdf vocabularies, in OTM Conferences (1), ed. by R. Meersman, Z. Tari. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4803 (Springer, Berlin, 2007), pp. 878–896. ISBN 978-3-540-76846-3

    Google Scholar 

  167. E. Prud’hommeaux, A. Seaborne, SPARQL Query Language for RDF, W3C Recommendation, 15 January 2008. http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/REC-rdf-sparql-query-20080115/

  168. B. Ramesh, M. Jarke, Toward reference models for requirements traceability. IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 27(1), 58–93 (2001). doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/32.895989

    Google Scholar 

  169. R. Reiter, A theory of diagnosis from first principles. Artif. Intell. 32(1), 57–95 (1987)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  170. Y. Ren, Syntactic approximation in PDDSL: A completeness guarantee. Technical report, University of Aberdeen, 2010. Http://www.abdn.ac.uk/~csc280/TR/pddsl.pdf

  171. Y. Ren, J.Z. Pan, Y. Zhao, Closed world reasoning for OWL2 with NBox. J. Tsinghua Sci. Tech. Vol. 15(6), December (2010) pp. 692–701

    Google Scholar 

  172. Y. Ren, J.Z. Pan, Y. Zhao, Soundness preserving approximation for TBox reasoning, in Proceedings of the 25th AAAI Conference Conference (AAAI2010), 2010

    Google Scholar 

  173. Y. Ren, J.Z. Pan, Y. Zhao, Towards soundness preserving approximation for abox reasoning of owl2, in Description Logics Workshop 2010 (DL2010), 2010

    Google Scholar 

  174. Y. Ren, J.Z. Pan, Y. Zhao, Abox syntactic approximation: A technical report. Technical report, University of Aberdeen, 2011. Http://www.abdn.ac.uk/~csc280/TR/aboxapprox.pdf

  175. Y. Ren, G. Gröner, J. Lemcke, T. Rahmani, A. Friesen, Y. Zhao, J.Z. Pan, S. Staab, Validating process refinement with ontologies, in Description Logics, ed. by B.C. Grau, I. Horrocks, B. Motik, U. Sattler. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 477. CEUR-WS.org, 2009

    Google Scholar 

  176. Y. Ren, G. Gröner, J. Lemcke, T. Rahmani, A. Friesen, Y. Zhao, J.Z. Pan, S. Staab, Process refinement validation and explanation with ontology reasoning. Technical report, University of Aberdeen, University of Koblenz-Landau and AP AG, 2011. http://www.abdn.ac.uk/~csc280/pub/ProcessRefinement.pdf

  177. M. Richters, A Precise Approach to Validating UML Models and OCL Constraints. Ph.D. thesis, Universität Bremen, 2002

    Google Scholar 

  178. D. Roe, K. Broda, A. Russo, Map** UML Models incorporating OCL Constraints into Object-Z. Technical report, August 2003. http://pubs.doc.ic.ac.uk/UMLtoObjecZ2003/

  179. D. Sangiorgi, Bisimulation for higher-order process calculi. Inform. Comput. 131, 141–178 (1996)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  180. D.C. Schmidt, Guest editor’s introduction: model-driven engineering. Computer 39, 25–31 (2006), ISSN 0018-9162

    Google Scholar 

  181. P.H. Schmitt, A Model Theoretic Semantics for OCL, in Proceedings of IJCAR Workshop on Precise Modelling and Deduction for Object-oriented Software Development, Siena, Italy, 2001

    Google Scholar 

  182. H. Schwarz, D4.2—report on traceability information extracting and using traceability information during the developement process. Project Deliverable ICT216691/UoKL/WP4-D2/D/PU/b1, MOST Project, January 2009

    Google Scholar 

  183. H. Schwarz, Taxonomy and definition of the explicit traceability information suppliable for guiding model-driven, ontology-supported development. Project Deliverable ICT216691/UoKL/WP4-D1/D/PU/b1, MOST Project, January 2009

    Google Scholar 

  184. H. Schwarz, J. Ebert, Bridging query languages in semantic and graph technologies, in Reasoning Web—6th International Summer School 2010 (Springer, Berlin, 2010)

    Google Scholar 

  185. H. Schwarz, J. Ebert, A. Winter, Graph-based traceability: a comprehensive approach. Software Syst. Model., November 2009 doi:10.1007/s10270-009-0141-4

    Google Scholar 

  186. H. Schwarz, J. Ebert, V. Riediger, A. Winter, Towards querying of traceability information in the context of software evolution, in 10th Workshop Software Reengineering (WSR 2008), ed. by R. Gimnich, U. Kaiser, J. Quante, A. Winter. GI Lecture Notes in Informatics, vol. 126. GI, 2008

    Google Scholar 

  187. E. Seidewitz, What models mean. IEEE Software 20(5), 26–32 (2003). ISSN 0740-7459. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/MS.2003.1231147

    Google Scholar 

  188. B. Selman, H. Kautz, Knowledge compilation and theory approximation. J. ACM 43(2), 193–224 (1996)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  189. I. Seylan, E. Franconi, J. De Bruijn, Effective query rewriting with ontologies over dboxes, in IJCAI’09: Proceedings of the 21st International Joint Conference on Artifical Intelligence (Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Francisco, CA, USA, 2009), pp. 923–929

    Google Scholar 

  190. S.A. Sherba, K.M. Anderson, M. Faisal, A framework for map** traceability relationships, in Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Traceability in Emerging Forms of Software Engineering, Montreal, 2003

    Google Scholar 

  191. S. Si-Said, C. Rolland, Formalising guidance for the crews goal-scenario approach to requirements engineering, in 8th European-Japanese Conference on Information Modelling and Knowledge Bases, 1998, pp. 172–190

    Google Scholar 

  192. F. Silva Parreiras, S. Staab, S. Schenk, A. Winter, Model driven specification of ontology translations, in Conceptual Modeling—ER 2008. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Springer, Berlin, 2008)

    Google Scholar 

  193. E. Sirin, B. Parsia, Sparql-dl: Sparql query for owl-dl, in OWLED, ed. by C. Golbreich, A. Kalyanpur, B. Parsia. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 258. CEUR-WS.org, 2007

    Google Scholar 

  194. E. Sirin, J. Tao, Towards integrity constraints in OWL, in OWL: Experiences and Directions, Sixth International Workshop (OWLED 2009), 2009

    Google Scholar 

  195. E. Sirin, B. Parsia, B. Grau, A. Kalyanpur, Y. Katz, Pellet: A practical owl-dl reasoner. Web Semant. Sci. Serv. Agents World Wide Web 5(2), 51–53 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  196. M. Śmiałek, Towards a requirements driven software development system. Poster presentation at MoDELS, Genova, Italy, 2006

    Google Scholar 

  197. G. Smith, The Object-Z Specification Language (Kluwer Academic, Norwell, MA, USA, 2000). ISBN 0-7923-8684-1

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  198. X. Song, W.M. Hasling, G. Mangla, B. Sherman, Lessons learned from building a web-based requirements tracing system, in ICRE ’98: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Requirements Engineering (IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, 1998), pp. 41–50. ISBN 0-8186-8356-2

    Book  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  200. W. Stinson, Views of Software Development Environments: Automation of Engineering and Engineering of Automation. In ACM SIGSOFT, Software Engineering Notes, Vol. 14(5) July 1989, pp. 108–117, ACM

    Google Scholar 

  201. H. Stuckenschmidt, F. van Harmelen, Approximating terminological queries, in Proceedings of FQAS2002, 2002, pp. 329–343

    Google Scholar 

  202. B. Suntisrivaraporn, Module extraction and incremental classification: a pragmatic aApproach for \({\mathcal{E}\mathcal{L}}^{+}\) ontologies, in Proceedings of the 5th European Semantic Web Conference (ESWC’08), ed. by S. Bechhofer, M. Hauswirth, J. Hoffmann, M. Koubarakis, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5021 (Springer, Berlin, 2008), pp. 230–244

    Google Scholar 

  203. E. Thomas, J.Z. Pan, Y. Ren, TrOWL: Tractable OWL 2 reasoning infrastructure, in Proceedings of the Extended Semantic Web Conference (ESWC2010), 2010

    Google Scholar 

  204. E. Tryggeseth, Ø. Nytrø, Dynamic traceability links supported by a system architecture description, in ICSM ’97: Proceedings of the International Conference on Software Maintenance, 1997, pp. 180–187

    Google Scholar 

  205. A. von Knethen, B. Paech, A survey on tracing approaches in theory and practice. Technical Report 095.01/E, Fraunhofer IESE, 2002

    Google Scholar 

  206. A. van Lamsweerde, Reasoning about alternative requirements options, in Conceptual Modeling: Foundations and Applications, ed. by A. Borgida, V.K. Chaudhri, P. Giorgini, E.S.K. Yu Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5600 (Springer, Berlin, 2009), pp. 380–397

    Google Scholar 

  207. A. Van Lamsweerde, R. Darimont, E. Letier, Managing conflicts in goal-driven requirements engineering. IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 24(11), 908–926 (1998). ISSN 0098-5589

    Google Scholar 

  208. H. Wache, P. Groot, H. Stuckenschmidt, Scalable instance retrieval for the semantic web by approximation, in Proceedings of WISE-2005 Workshop on Scalable Semantic Web Knowledge Base Systems, 2005

    Google Scholar 

  209. S. Walderhaug, U. Johansen, E. Stav, J. Aagedal, Towards a generic solution for traceability in MDD, in ECMDA Traceability Workshop (ECMDA-TW) 2006 Proceedings, Bilbao, 2006

    Google Scholar 

  210. T. Walter, J. Ebert, Combining DSLs and ontologies using metamodel integration, in Domain-Specific Languages. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5658 (Springer, Berlin, 2009), pp. 148–169

    Google Scholar 

  211. T. Walter, J. Ebert, Combining ontology-enriched domain-specific languages, in Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Transforming and Weaving Ontologies in Model Driven Engineering (TWOMDE) at MoDELS, 2009

    Google Scholar 

  212. T. Walter, H. Schwarz, Y. Ren, Establishing a bridge from graph-based modeling languages to ontology languages, in Proceedings of the 3rd Workshop on Transforming and Weaving OWL Ontologies and MDE/MDA (TWOMDE 2010), 2010

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  214. T. Walter, F. Silva Parreiras, S. Staab, J. Ebert, Joint language and domain engineering, in Proceedings of 6th European Conference on Modelling Foundations and Applications, ECMFA 2010, Paris. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 6138 (Springer, Berlin, 2010)

    Google Scholar 

  215. H. Wang, Y. Li, J. Sun, H. Zhang, J. Pan, A semantic web approach to feature modeling and verification, in 1st Workshop on Semantic Web Enabled Software Engineering (SWESE’05), 2005

    Google Scholar 

  216. C.A. Welty, D.A. Ferrucci, What’s in an instance. Technical Report 94/18, RPI Computer Science Department, NY, 1994

    Google Scholar 

  217. C. Wende, S. Zivkovic, U. Aßmann, H. Kühn, Feature-based customisation of MDSD tool environments. Technical Report TUD-FI10-05-Juli 2010, Technische Universität Dresden, July 2010

    Google Scholar 

  218. R. Wieringa, An introduction to requirements traceability. Technical Report IR-389, Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science, Amsterdam, 1995

    Google Scholar 

  219. S. Winkler, J. von Pilgrim, A survey of traceability in requirements engineering and model-driven development. Software Syst. Model. 9(4), 529–565 (2010). doi:10.1007/s10270-009-0141-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  220. A. Winter, Referenz-metaschema für visuelle modellierungssprachen. DUV Informatik. Deutscher Universitätsverlag, 2000

    Google Scholar 

  221. R. Witte, Y. Zhang, J. Rilling, Empowering software maintainers with semantic web technologies, in Proceedings of the 4th European Semantic Web Conference (ESCW 2007). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4519, 2007, pp. 37–52. doi:0.1007/978-3-540-72667-8_5

    Google Scholar 

  222. G.M. Wyner, J. Lee, Defining specialization for process models, in Organizing Business Knowledge: The MIT Process Handbook, chapter 5 (MIT, Cambridge, 2003), pp. 131–174

    Google Scholar 

  223. A. Yie, D. Wagelaar, Advanced traceability with ATL, in Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Model Transformation with ATL (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  224. R. Yuan, J.Z. Pan, Y. Zhao, Soundness Preserving Approximation for TBox Reasoning. In Proc. of the 24th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI2010), 2010

    Google Scholar 

  225. Y. Zhao, J.Z. Pan, Y. Ren, Implementing and evaluating a rule-based approach to querying regular el+ ontologies, in Proceedings of the International Conference on Hybrid Intelligent Systems (HIS2009), 2009

    Google Scholar 

  226. S. Zivkovic, C. Wende, A. Bartho, B. Gregorcic, D2.3—initial prototype of ontology-driven software process guidance system. Project Deliverable ICT216691/TUD/WP2-D3/D/PU/b1.00, MOST Project, 2009

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. FUMEC University, Minas Gerais, Brazil

    Fernando Silva Parreiras

  2. University of Koblenz-Landau, Koblenz, Germany

    Gerd Gröner, Tobias Walter & Hannes Schwarz

  3. SAP Research, Karlsruhe, Germany

    Andreas Friesen, Tirdad Rahmani & Jens Lemcke

  4. COMARCH S.A., Krak#x00F3;w, Germany

    Krzysztof Miksa

  5. DevBoost GmbH, Berlin, Germany

    Christian Wende

  6. Technical University Dresden, Dresden, Germany

    Uwe Aßmann

Authors
  1. Fernando Silva Parreiras
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gerd Gröner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Tobias Walter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Andreas Friesen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Tirdad Rahmani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Jens Lemcke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Hannes Schwarz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Krzysztof Miksa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Christian Wende
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Uwe Aßmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. , Department of Computing Science, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, AB243UE, United Kingdom

    Jeff Z. Pan

  2. Insitute for Computer Science, University of Koblenz-Landau, Universitaetsstr. 1, Koblenz, 56016, Germany

    Steffen Staab

  3. , Institute for Software-, Technical University of Dresden, Nöthnitzer Strasse 46, Dresden, 01069, Germany

    Uwe Aßmann

  4. , Institute for Software Technology, University of Koblenz-Landau, Universitätsstraße, Koblenz, 56070, Germany

    Jürgen Ebert

  5. , Department of Computing Science, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, AB243UE, United Kingdom

    Yuting Zhao

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Parreiras, F.S. et al. (2013). Model-Driven Software Development. In: Pan, J., Staab, S., Aßmann, U., Ebert, J., Zhao, Y. (eds) Ontology-Driven Software Development. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-31226-7_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-31226-7_2

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-31225-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-31226-7

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation