D. H. Akehurst and S. J. H. Kent. A relational approach to defining transformations in a metamodel. In J.-M. Jezequel, H. Hussmann, and S. Cook, editors, UML 2002 -- The Unified Modeling Language : 5th International Conference, pages 243 -- 258. Springer-Verlag, 2002. Home/Search Document Not in Database Summary Related Articles Check |
This paper is cited in the following contexts:
Automated Formal Verification of Model Tranformations - Varro, Pataricza (Correct)
....Existing model transformation approaches can be grouped into two main categories: Relational approaches: these approaches typically declare a relationship between objects (and links) of the source and target language. Such a specification typically based upon a metamodel with OCL constraints [1, 11, 17]. Operational approaches these techniques describe the process of a model transformation from the source to the target language. Such a specification mainly combines metamodeling with (c) graph transformation [5, 8, 9, 14, 27] d) triple graph grammars [22] e) term rewriting rules [28] or ....
D. Akehurst and S. Kent. A relational approach to defining transformations in a metamodel. In J.-M. Jezequel, H. Hussmann, and S. Cook (eds.), Proc. Fifth Intern. Conf. on the Unified Modeling Language -- The Language and its Applications, vol. 2460 of LNCS, pp. 243--258. Springer, Dresden, Germany, 2002.
UML Action Semantics for Model Tranformations - Varro, Pataricza (Correct)
....Existing model transformation approaches can be grouped into two main categories: Relational approaches: these approaches typically declare a relationship between objects (and links) of the source and target language. Such a specification typically based upon a metamodel with OCL constraints [1, 12]. Operational approaches these techniques describe the process of a model transformation from the source to the target language. Such a specification mainly combines metamodeling with (c) graph transformation [3,5,6,8,21,22] d) triple graph grammars [18] e) term rewriting rules [23] or (f) ....
D. Akehurst and S. Kent. A relational approach to defining transformations in a metamodel. In J.-M. Jezequel, H. Hussmann, and S. Cook (eds.), Proc. Fifth Intern. Conf. on the Unified Modeling Language -- The Language and its Applications, vol. 2460 of LNCS, pp. 243--258. Springer, Dresden, Germany, 2002.
Model Transformations And Tool Integration - Tratt (2004) (Correct)
No context found.
D. H. Akehurst and S. J. H. Kent. A relational approach to defining transformations in a metamodel. In J.-M. Jezequel, H. Hussmann, and S. Cook, editors, UML 2002 -- The Unified Modeling Language : 5th International Conference, pages 243 -- 258. Springer-Verlag, 2002.
Extended Model Relations with Graphical Consistency Conditions - Hausmann, Heckel, Sauer (2002) (1 citation) (Correct)
No context found.
St. Kent and D. Akehurst. A relational approach to defining transformations in a metamodel. In Proc. UML 2002, Dresden, Germany, LNCS. Springer-Verlag, 2002. To appear.
Unknown - (Correct)
No context found.
D. Akehurst and S. Kent. A relational approach to defining transformations in a metamodel. In J.-M. Jezequel, H. Hussmann, and S. Cook, editors, Proc. Fifth Intern. Conf. on the Unified Modeling Language -- The Language and its Applications, volume 2460 of LNCS, pages 243--258, Dresden, Germany, September 30 -- October 4 2002. Springer-Verlag.
Model Refactorings as Rule-Based Update Transformations - Porres (2003) (2 citations) (Correct)
No context found.
D. H. Akehurst and S. Kent. A relational approach to defining transformations in a metamodel. In J.-M. Jzquel, H. Hussmann, and S. Cook, editors, Proc. UML 2002.
Online articles have much greater impact More about CiteSeer.IST Add search form to your site Submit documents Feedback
CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC