INF Lecture plan

Transcription

1 INF5120 Modellbasert Systemutvikling Modelbased System development Lecture 12: Arne-Jørgen Berre or Telecom and Informatics 1 INF Lecture plan Part I: SSI Service Innovation and Agile Service/Software Engineering Part II: SSMDE Model Driven Engineering Part III Model Driven Interoperability and ADM 1: 16/1: Introduction to Model Based System Development (INF5120) 2: 23/1: SIE I: Enterprise Architecture, Role modeling-collaboration and Value Networks Verna Allee (VNA) 3: 30/1: SIE II:: Business Process Modeling with BPMN 2.0 and Business Model Innovation - Peter Lindgren (BMI) 4: 6/2: SIE III: AT ONE User-oriented design with Use cases and user stories 5: 13/2: SIE IV: Service modeling with SoaML Service modeling - Design, patterns 6: 20/2: SIE V: Precise Modeing in UML with OCL and Design with DCI - Design, patterns 7: 27/2: MDE I: Software Process Model Frameworks Essence/SEMAT, SPEM, EPF and ISO Shihong Huang/Brian Elvesæter/Arne J. Berre 8: 5/3: MDE II: Metamodels, Domain specific languages and UML profiles (Franck Fleurey, Brian Elvesæter) 9: 12/3: MDE III: Metamodeling, MDLE and DSL Tools (EMF, GMF, ATL, Kermeta) (Franck Fleurey) 10: 19/3: MDE IV: Model transformations - MOFScript, QVT DSLs with examples (Franck Fleurey) 11: 26/3: MDE V: Method Engineering and CORAS UML profile-: DSL example (Arne J. Berre) 2/4, 9/4: EASTER 12: 16/4: MDE VI: User Interface Modeling WebRatio-WEBML, ESITO-Genova, OMG IFML 13: 23/4: MDI I: MDE for SOA (Accenture/NAV) - and introduction to Semantic technologies 14: 30/4: MDI II: Semantics and Model Driven Interoperability 15: 7/5: MDI III: ADM and Migration to SOA/SaaS/Cloud computing 16: 13/5: Conclusion and Summary for INF Preparation of Exam Exam: Monday June 4th, 2011, (4 hours) Telecom and Informatics 2

2 INF5120 Oblig/Exercise plan : 16/1: None 2: 23/1: Guest lecture: Value Networks Verna Allee (VNA) 3: 30/1: Guest lecture: Business Model Innovation - Peter Lindgren (BMI) Establish groups 4: 6/2: AT ONE initial exercise overall approach for Oblig 1 myservicefellow 5: 13/2: Group presentation 6: 20/2: Group presentation 7: 27/2: Group presentation 8: 5/3: MDE Tools introduction Oblig 2 intro 9: 12/3: MDE Tools II - EMF 10: 21/3: MDE Transformation tools - Delivery of Oblig 1 11: 26/3: Walk through of Oblig 1 2/4, 9/4: EASTER 12: 16/4: Discussion on Oblig 2 13: 23/4: Discussion on Oblig 2 14: 30/4: Oblig 2 delivery 15: 7/5: Oblig 2 summary 16: 13/5: Conclusion and Summary for INF Preparation of Exam Exam: Monday June 4th, 2011, (4 hours) Telecom and Informatics 3 Outline WebRatio MDE tool WebML modeling language WebRatio Modeling methodology ESITO Genova (Knut Sagli) OMG IFML RFP process and proposal Telecom and Informatics 4

3 WebRatio WebRatio demonstration &v=jdrwakslsvy Telecom and Informatics 6

4 References - overview presentation on WebML - slides, materials, exercises with solutions on WebML: (exercises at the bottom of the page) - audio lessons with interactive slides in English: follow separate links in the page: - download of webratio personal NOTICE: don't download webratio free, but webratio personal - presentation on the move towards IFML Telecom and Informatics 7 What is WebRatio An Eclipse-based development environment allowing: Modeling: ER + WebML + BPMN 100% code generation of standard JEE applications Clear separation between design time and run time No proprietary runtime Quick and agile development cycles Extending the generation rules Defining new presentation styles Defining new components Versioning, teamwork, full lifecycle mgt Requirement Analysis Results Verification Solution Modeling Prototype Generation 8

5 A fertile environment for designing, building and maintaining your custom enterprise applications 9 WebRatio Architecture

6 WebRatio Step 1 You capture business requirements in abstract, technology independent models Business User WebRatio Modeller 11 Design the model Process Model Define business processes managed by the application BPMN notation Application Model Define data, services, logic and presentation details WebML notation 12

7 WebRatio Step 2 You customize the environment by defining your own generation rules Layout Designer Java Programmer 13 Customize the generation rules Layout templates for a perfectly fine-tuned layout, tailored to your visual identity Custom components for implementing any kind of business logic, integration or complex task 14

8 WebRatio Step 3 You get a tailored, yet standard, Java Web application with no proprietary runtime WebRatio Modeller Business User 15 Get the application Browser Standard execution environment Web App Standard Java Application Server DBMS Custom Information System SOA 16

9 An evolutionary prototyping dev cycle Involve business users in the development process and converge quickly to the target Requirement Analysis Results Validation Solution Modelling Application Generation The two ways of MDD Model Interpretation Design-time Run-time Model Immediately available Model Code Generation Analyst / Modeller Vendor-dependent code Interpreter App User Model Generation Engine Generation and deploy Generated Application Analyst / Modeller Generation Rules App User Layout Designer Java Programmer 18

10 Why we chose Code Generation 3 reasons in favour of Code Generation Execution environment is as standard as possible standard architecture, standard libraries fitting corporate IT policies Two degrees of freedom instead of one not all the requirements can be modelled define, use and reuse your own generation rules No vendor lock-in generated code is human-readable, applications can be easily maintained without the tool 19 How you can be agile Iterative, agile development? Model Zero-cost, 1-click, prototype generation Generation Engine Generation Rules Different deployment configurations Development / Testing environment Development Prototype Final Application Final execution environment Test User Final App User 20

11 How you can keep on generating Do you want to touch the generated application? Touch the generation rules instead!? Model Generation Engine Generation Rules Generated Application 21 Kinds of application Document Management Knowledge Management Learning Management Project Management Web Front-End of accounting sys. Payment Services Orchestration Front-Office Process Mgt Knowledge Support Business Intelligence Financial Services Product Life Cycle Management Web Content Management Human Capital Management Customer Relationship Management Supply Chain Management Enterprise Resource Planning Recruitment Training Workforce Management Corporate Operations Customer Information Mgt Sales and Lead Management Partner Relationship Mgt Marketing Resources Mgt Web Customer Services B2C/B2B E-Commerce Supplier Relationship Mgt Enterprise Governance Risk and Compliance Order Mgt 22

12 A solid foundation: WebML Lesson learned from WebML WebML is the core of the upcoming IFML standard Expanded to new classes of applications Stripped of non-ui aspects (e.g., business logic orchestration) Reasons for the success of the current notation Extremely compact (no useless overhead) Effective (allows to model exactly what users want) Efficient (grants high reusability of model fragments) Easy to learn (very low learning curve) Comprehensive (covers most of the web interaction needs) Open and extensible (for covering any ad hoc logic) 24

13 Some words on the WebML history 1998: Born within the W3I3 EU project Visual modeling of Web application interfaces 2003: Evolved to the management of Web services (WebSi EU project) 2005: Evolved to the support of business processes (WebSi EU project) 2006: Added support to semantic web aspects (SWS Challenge) : continuous improvements, metamodel definition, support for additional aspects: reuse, async interactions,... Currently adopted in more than 300 universities worldwide for research and education purposes 25 Effective and essential A visual modeling language (DSL)... Oriented to the high level design Incorporating all the details that are needed for refined specification... Effective and essential... Including only the concepts relevant to the domain No overhead because of verbose notation or orthogonality... For user interaction design... Page contents Navigation paths and UI events... Within web applications Born bottom-up from the features of dynamic web applications 26

14 Role and positioning Contents: ER, class,.. Process: BPMN User Interaction: WebML Style: CSS,... BPMN model Backend: soaml, WSDL.. Services 27 The WebML notation example GetUser ReviewPage CurrentUser PreferredArtists Two pages Retrieval of session data (CurrentUser) CurrentUser CurrentUser AllArtists Artist [UserPreference] ArtistDetails Review Page Lists of (prefered) artists Links to artist details Albums Page Artist Albums AlbumIndex KO DeleteAlbum Artist List of albums of selected artist Checkbox and deletion of albums Album [PlayedByArtist] OK Album

15 Content publishing units IN: Param1,... ParamN UnitName UnitType OUT: Params A WebML unit is the atomic information publishing element A view defined upon a container of objects: The instances of a concept Concept [Selector (Param1,..., ParamN)] Based on one or more complex selection conditions (called selectors) A unit may need some inputs and produces some outputs Inputs are required to compute the unit itself (params of the selector) Outputs can be used to compute other unit(s) 29 Links AllArtists ArtistDetails Artist Links in WebML have 3 purposes Describe navigation paths Transport parameters between units Artist Activate computation of units and execution of side effects Normally, links are rendered as one or more anchors/buttons based on the dataset and semantics of the source unit Various behaviors are allowed (automatic, asynchronous, transport..) Transport links: only carry parameters, no navigation nor side effects

16 Operation units OperationName OpType OK KO Execution of operations and business logic Simple failure/success model of operations Success: green OK link is navigated Failure: red KO link is navigated Chains of operations can be defined Control dictated by links Concept [Selector (Param1,..., ParamN)] Basic control flow elements available (loop, switch) 31 Units coverage Content publishing Data Index MultiData Entry Scroller Multichoice HierarchicalIndex Session management Web Services Login Logout Get Set Request-Response. CRUD Operations Create Modify Delete Connect Disconnect 32

17 Foundations and extensibility The language foundations Basic set of units Connection to a content model for data retrieval and management Links for control and data flow Page computation algorithms for execution semantics The page content is automatically calculated also in case of complex topologies Incoming links and dependencies among units are considered The language is open New units and operations can be specified For implementing ad-hoc business logics 33 Some relevant experiences IT industry worldwide web site + CMS and product catalogue Finance Web-based, multi country, End-to-end Front-Office Process Mgt platform Ecuador cooperative network cash flow compensation system Fashion & Furniture Unsold items mgt system Warehouse mgt system Energy & Utilities Web-based, IT budget monitoring system Web-based security law compliance system Green energy department internal knowledge base system Web site + CMS + online customer services Public Sector Electronic invoice mgt system Public transport pass e-ticketing system Mobile public portal Web-based cash control system Internal training system 34

18 Summary WebRatio is now at its 6 th major release (the 7 th due since the end of 2012) on the market since 2001 WebRatio customers 120+ companies and 500+ users in Italy, Europe and South America WebRatio adoption 15,000+ users of the free edition Used in hundreds of universities all over the world WebRatio partners 40+ software houses and system integrators 300+ universities worldwide, students New book, May

19 OMG IFML RFP Process Experiences and requirements for a User Interaction Modeling Language Marco Brambilla marcobrambi Politecnico di Milano and WebRatio RFP Schedule Event or Activity Actual Date Preparation of RFP by TF November 14, 2011 RFP placed on OMG document server November 14, 2011 Approval of RFP by Architecture Board Review by TC December 16, 2011 December 2011 TC votes to issue RFP December 16, 2011 LOI to submit to RFP due May 20, 2012 Initial Submissions due and placed on server (4 week) August 20, 2012 Voter registration closes August 20, 2012 Initial Submission presentations August 20, 2012 Preliminary evaluation by TF September, 2012 Revised Submissions due and placed on svr. (4 week) February, 2013 Revised Submission presentations March 20, 2013 Final evaluation and selection by TF Recommendation to AB and TC June, 2013 Approval by Architecture Board Review by TC June, 2013 TC votes to recommend specification June, 2013 BoD votes to adopt specification June,

20 Mandatory requirements A MOF-compliant metamodel which describes the user interaction within frontend interfaces, their constituents, and their connections with back-end business components, data storage and Web Services. A concrete syntax for the interaction flow notation which provides an intuitive representation of the user interface composition, interaction and control logic for the front-end designer. Specified through Diagram Definition A UML Profile consistent to the metamodel. A complete mapping between the UML Profile and the metamodel. An interchange format between tools using XMI. 39 Mandatory application requirements Multiple views for the same application Support for mobile and multi-device applications view components: the visualization and input of data, and the production of events. view components shall be independent of the concrete widgets at PS level the presentation aspects interaction flow, initiated by the user or by external events, in terms of: 1. a source component; 2. possibly, a reference to an action flow model specifying the actions triggered by the event; 3) one or more target view modules and components that are presented as the result of the interaction. Extensibility for components User context: the user status in the current instant of the interaction (position, history, machine, platform, ) 40

21 Mandatory application requirements Reference to content model items declarative specification of a data binding between a view component and a subschema of the Content Model Reference to atomic actions and actions orchestrations triggered by an event. Actions consist of business components and/or services that are invoked upon the event Outcome of actions and orchestrations and for describing how the view reacts to these outcomes Parameter passing dependencies Modeling capabilities for expressing the architectural tier where the business component triggered by an event is executed define Reference mechanism to role-based access control (RBAC) for describing access control rules to view components or modules mapping of the view components and modules at the PIM level to PSM artifacts 41 Issues to be discussed non-normative example models and accompanying explanatory text to illustrate the usage to define a typical front-end system for an application. Examples shall cover the metamodel, profile, concrete syntax and interchange format platform-independent semantics defining how the view is computed as the result of an event occurrence and of a possible action and/or orchestration invocation mapping of the view components and modules at the PIM level to PSM artifacts 42

22 Optional requirements Modularization of the model (design-time containers for reuse purposes of model fragments) User input validation, according to OCL or other existing constraint languages inference rules that make model specification simpler and more concise 43 Evaluation How compact and usable the proposed modeling language is How general and platform-independent the language and its concepts are The availability of a proof of concept implementation How compatible the proposal is with respect to existing, well-established practices in user interaction modeling 44

23 The Standardization Gap Standardization gap A perceived gap in the standardization efforts User interaction has been overlooked in modeling proposals Previous attempts failed because of: Low usability and effectiveness of notation Missing solid implementations with vendors support 46

24 WebML in the OMG framework Exploit the possible relations with BPMN -- Already in place Structure models (Class, components, CWM ) SOAml SysML Others Support the standardization Refine the metamodel Implement appropriate injectors to MOF-compliant models 47 The Standardization Effort: towards IFML

25 Objectives of IFML Expressing Content of interfaces User events and interaction Binding to business logic of the front-end of applications belonging to diverse domains 49 Advantages formal specification of the different perspectives of the front-end Isolate implementation-specific issues of UIs separation of concerns in the user interaction design enable the communication of interaction design to non-technical stakeholders automatic generation of code also for the application front-end part 50

26 Focus The VIEW part of a software application view components view modules events interaction between components Interaction between the user and the components (events) the distribution of view components and referenced data and business logic at the different tiers of the architecture 51 Mandatory requirements A MOF-compliant metamodel which describes the user interaction within frontend interfaces, their constituents, and their connections with back-end business components, data storage and Web Services. A concrete syntax for the interaction flow notation which provides an intuitive representation of the user interface composition, interaction and control logic for the front-end designer. Graphical and textual alternative representations A UML Profile consistent to the metamodel. A complete mapping between the UML Profile and the metamodel. An interchange format between tools using XMI. 52

27 Mandatory application requirements Multiple views for the same application Mobile and multi-device applications Visualization and input of data, and production of events Components independent of concrete widgets and presenation Interaction flow, initiated by the user or by external events User context: the user status in the current instant of the interaction (position, history, machine, platform, ) Modularization of the model (design-time containers for reuse purposes of model fragments) But not: User input validation, according to OCL or other existing constraint languages inference rules that make model specification simpler and more concise 53 The IFML metamodel

28 The IFML metamodel The IFML metamodel

29 The UML profile for IFML Static aspects «page» AlbumSearch «page» Albums «page» Album Album Search Album Index Album Detail «index» MBox List «link» «index» Message Index 57 The UML profile for IFML Static aspects Signals with tagged values «signal» SelectMailMessages mbox :string Tagged values. Parameter mbox out name: selectedmbox in name: mbox Dynamic aspects «index» MBox List SelectMailMessages(mBox) «index» Message Index 58

30 IFML concrete syntax by example 59 IFML concrete syntax by example 60

31 IFML concrete syntax by example 61 IFML concrete syntax by example 62

32 A real example.. The complete Gmail UI GMAIL top [X] Messages [L D] <<XOR>> Message search <<D>> Search <<P>> FullSearch Delete Archive Report MarkAll AsRead Mbox List OUT: AllMessages IN: MessageSet OUT: SelectedMessages IN: MessageSet OUT: Keyword IN: SearchKey <<XOR>> Message Management MailBox <<XOR>> MarkAll Delete Archive Report * <<D>> Message keyword search Search mail Message Index Message toolbar <<parameter>> MessageSet MoveTo Show search options Message Reader Message details Message full search ReplyToAll Forward Reply State = NewMessage OR Forward {Self.MessageRecipients >1} OUT: MessageID IN: MessageID <<L>> Message writer Discard Add Cc OUT: Keyword, From, To.,... IN: SearchKey, FromKey, ToKey,.. <<form>> Message Writer <<field>> To Message notification <<L>> Settings Reply ToAll State = Reply OR Forward OUT: Subject, From, Cc, Body, ReplyAll IN: Re: + Subject, To, Cc, Body, State OUT: NewTag IN: ATag Associate to tag / Move to folder Create Tag/ Folder OUT: SelectedTag IN: ATag <<P>> Tag chooser Select Tag Create New Tag/ Folder Index <<M>> Tag creator Create New Tag/ Folder State = Reply OR ReplyToAll Add Bcc Edit subject Add attachment <<field>> Cc <<field>> Bcc <<field>> Subject <<field>> Body <<field>> Attachment <<parameter>> State Send Save Reply Forward State = Forward OR ReplyToAll OUT: Subject, From,, Body, Reply IN: Re: + Subject, To, Cc, Body, State OUT: Subject,,, Body, Forward IN: Fw: + Subject, To, Cc, Body, State OUT: NewTagName IN: TagName Send Action Save Action State = Reply OR ReplyToAll 63