W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-swbp-wg@w3.org > November 2005

Re: [ALL, SE] Review of Se SW Primer for OOSD

From: Elisa F. Kendall <ekendall@sandsoft.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 09:47:07 -0800
Message-ID: <438B429B.1010209@sandsoft.com>
To: swbp <public-swbp-wg@w3.org>

Hi All,

I've reviewed the 2005/11/14 version of the note posted at 
and have the following comments:

Overall, this looks pretty good from my perspective, and the examples in 
particular are really helpful.

1.  Abstract -- I think Jeremy had feedback on this - it really needs 
tightening up and possibly bullets would
help with the flow.  If Jeff/Phil would like me to help in this regard, 
let me know once the other issues
have been addressed.

2.  Introduction -- I would like to see the example use OCL to represent 
the constraint that is currently a
note, since MDA-based models that adhere to design by contract methods 
would do this today, enabling
code generation for the behavioral constraint as well as for the 
structural elements of the model.  There may
be a similar example in Dave Frankel's book we can draw from to support 
this, for a similar application,
in fact.  Also, several of the issues raised in the paragraph beginning 
"Since we anticipate ..." could actually
be handled today through OCL - we should find specific semantic issues 
that either cannot be, or that are
really tricky to implement in OCL rather than the simpler ones, or use 
the countries example from the
following paragraph to show how the semantics differ.

One thing that could be emphasized is the advantage that separating the 
domain vocabulary from the
rules (OCL) brings not only from a reusability/patterns perspective but 
from a scalability perspective when
talking about design-by-contract.  Factoring the vocabulary from the 
rules not only addes this, but
supports reuse of rule patterns. 

3/4. Application Development -- Either here or in the following section, 
it would be good to have a paragraph
to discuss a stepwise process that includes ontology development, 
consistency checking, validation -->
integrating the ontology with the application --> consistency checking 
of parts of the application model
where possible using OWL reasoners --> code generation.  This might fit 
in with the Dynamic
Object Model discussion, but the advantages of model consistency 
checking cannot be emphasized enough

Appendix -- no mention of ODM?  or any of the OMG standards?  I'll 
create a list of links and references
to add and forward them to SE separately, along with inline comments on 
the document itself.



Guus Schreiber wrote:

>    ACTION: Elisa Kendall to send review comments on SE
>      Primer by 25 Nov
Received on Monday, 28 November 2005 17:47:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:31:14 UTC