This document summarizes a survey of existing model view approaches. The survey identified 16 approaches and developed a feature model to characterize and compare them. Generally, existing approaches focus on a reduced set of features and have limitations around view updating, maintenance, and security. The document outlines areas for further research, including model management tasks, multi-viewpoint modeling, and incremental querying and transformation as they relate to implementing model view approaches.

1. A Feature-based Survey of
Model View Approaches
(SOSYM First)
ACM/IEEE 21st International Conference on
Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems
October 18, 2018 - Copenhagen, Denmark
Hugo Bruneliere, Erik Burger,
Jordi Cabot, Manuel Wimmer

2. ● Engineering of complex systems (e.g. SoS, CPSs)
○ Models have different nature, number or size
○ Need for views combining these models
● View-based approaches in Software Engineering
○ Predefined set of viewpoints (e.g. EA frameworks)
○ Lack of flexibility, views may change over time
● MDE / Modeling should allow for more flexibility
○ What is the current situation in this area?
○ Survey on existing model view approaches...
Introduction
2

3. Motivating Example from EA (1/2)
3

4. Motivating Example from EA (2/2)
4

5. Terminology
5
● General definitions
○ System
○ (Base) metamodel & model
○ Viewpoint / viewtype, view

6. ● First, manual selection (based on our own experience)
○ 10 approaches identified...
● Then, refinement based on DBLP as datasource...
Survey Methodology - Overview
6

7. ● 16 approaches finally
selected
● Agreement on the overall
terminology
● Production of a feature
model
● Description & comparison
of the 16 approaches
according to it...
Survey Methodology - Data extraction
7

8. A feature model for model view approaches
8

9. A feature model for model view approaches
9

10. A feature model for model view approaches
10

11. Descriptions and Comparison
11

12. ● Some commonly shared aspects
○ E.g. required explicit definition of viewpoint/viewtype
● Each feature is covered by one approach (at least)
● Most solutions focus on a reduced set of features
○ Lack of very general solutions for broader scenarios
● Some more challenging / rarely addressed features
○ Verification support for viewpoints/views
○ Graphical languages for viewpoint/view definition
General findings
12

13. ● Terminology inconsistencies
○ Different background, different definitions, etc.
● View update problem
○ Current support restricted to relatively simple cases
● (Incremental) View maintenance
○ Limited as well, cf. work on incremental transformation
● Concrete syntax generation
○ Not really supported so far: default syntax generation
● Security aspects
○ Model views to support access-control mechanisms
A research agenda
13

14. ● Model management tasks
○ Composition, matching, merging, diff, etc.
● Multi-viewpoint modeling (e.g. ODP, UML, MDWE)
○ Fixed viewpoints, language-specific solutions
● Software architectures (e.g. ISO 42010)
○ Synthetic vs. Projective approaches
● Language/DSL engineering
○ Language composition, globalization, weaving, etc.
● Incremental model querying and transformation
○ Implementation of model view approaches...
Related work
14

15. ● Main contributions
○ Recollection of existing model view approaches
○ Feature model for characterizing/comparing them
○ Research agenda on related challenging issues
● We are already working on some of these challenges...
○ Talk on October 19, in the Model Management session (from
10:00 to 11:30) - https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01845976
● We hope to raise awareness and trigger broader
discussion within the Modeling community!
Conclusion
15

16. Check out the full paper from https://hal.inria.fr/hal-01590674
Springer link - https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10270-017-0622-9
hugo.bruneliere@imt-atlantique.fr, burger@kit.edu,
jordi.cabot@icrea.cat, wimmer@big.tuwien.ac.at
Thanks for your attention!
16