% % GENERATED FROM http://acme.able.cs.cmu.edu % by : anonymous % IP : ec2-18-222-163-231.us-east-2.compute.amazonaws.com % at : Fri, 22 Nov 2024 04:57:46 -0500 GMT % % Selection : Publication #168 %
@InProceedings{Garlan2000e, AUTHOR = {Garlan, David and Kompanek, Andrew}, TITLE = {Reconciling the Needs of Architectural Description with Object-Modeling Notations}, YEAR = {2000}, MONTH = {October}, BOOKTITLE = {Proceedings of the Third International Conference on the Unified Modeling Language - << UML >> 2000}, ADDRESS = {York, UK}, PDF = {http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/project/able/ftp/uml00/uml00.pdf}, PS = {http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/project/able/ftp/uml00/uml00.ps}, ABSTRACT = {Complex software systems require expressive notations for representing their software architectures. Two competing paths have emerged. One is to use a specialized notation for architecture -- or architecture description language (ADL). The other is to adapt a general-purpose modeling notation, such as UML. The latter has a number of benefits including familiarity to developers, close mapping to implementations, and commercial tool support. However, it remains an open question as to how best to use object-oriented notations for architectural description, and, indeed, whether they are sufficiently expressive, as currently defined. In this paper we take a systematic look at these questions, examining the space of possible mappings from ADLs into object notations. Specifically, we describe (a) the principle strategies for representing architectural structure in UML; (b) the benefits and limitations of each strategy; and (c) aspects of architectural description that are intrinsically difficult to model in UML using the strategies. }, KEYWORDS = {Software Architecture, UML} }