Content deleted Content added
clean up, typo(s) fixed: For example → For example, (2), However → However, using AWB |
Rescuing 3 sources and tagging 0 as dead. #IABot (v1.6.1) |
||
Line 1:
'''Model-driven architecture''' ('''MDA®''') is a [[software design]] approach for the development of [[software system]]s. It provides a set of guidelines for the structuring of specifications, which are expressed as [[model (abstract)|model]]s. Model-driven architecture is a kind of [[___domain engineering]], and supports [[model-driven engineering]] of software systems. It was launched by the [[Object Management Group]] (OMG) in 2001.<ref name=proposal>[http://www.omg.org/news/releases/pr2001/2001-03-08a.htm "OMG pursues new strategic direction to build on success of past efforts"] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060924103531/http://www.omg.org/news/releases/pr2001/2001-03-08a.htm |date=2006-09-24 }}</ref>
== Overview ==
Line 31:
The OMG organization provides rough specifications rather than implementations, often as answers to [[Request for Proposal|Requests for Proposals]] (RFPs). The OMG documents the overall process in a document called the MDA Guide.
Basically, an MDA tool is a tool used to develop, interpret, compare, align, measure, verify, transform, etc. models or metamodels.<ref>{{cite paper|author=Bézivin, J, Gérard, S, Muller, P-A, and Rioux, L|title=MDA components: Challenges and Opportunities|version
An MDA tool may be one or more of the following types{{Citation needed|date=February 2007}}:
Line 67:
=== MDA concerns ===
Some key concepts that underpin the MDA approach (launched in 2001) were first elucidated by the [[Shlaer-Mellor]] method during the late 1980s. Indeed, a key absent technical standard of the MDA approach (that of an action language syntax for [[Executable UML]]) has been bridged by some vendors by adapting the original Shlaer-Mellor Action Language (modified for UML){{Citation needed|date=February 2007}}. However, during this period the MDA approach has not gained mainstream industry acceptance; with the [[Gartner Group]] still identifying MDA as an "on the rise" technology in its 2006 "[[Hype cycle|Hype Cycle]]",<ref name=gartnermda>[http://www.gartner.com/DisplayDocument?ref=g_search&id=494180&subref=simplesearch "Hype Cycle for Emerging Technologies, 2006"] $495.00</ref> and [[Forrester Research]] declaring MDA to be "D.O.A." in 2006.<ref name=forrestermda>[http://www.forrester.com/Research/Document/Excerpt/0,7211,39156,00.html "MDA Is DOA, Partly Thanks To SOA"] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071013004355/http://forrester.com/Research/Document/Excerpt/0,7211,39156,00.html |date=2007-10-13 }}</ref> Potential concerns that have been raised with the OMG MDA approach include:
* Incomplete Standards: The MDA approach is underpinned by a variety of technical standards, some of which are yet to be specified (e.g. an action semantic language for [[Executable UML|xtUML]]), or are yet to be implemented in a standard manner (e.g. a [[QVT]] transformation engine or a [[Platform-independent model|PIM]] with a virtual execution environment).<ref name=mdanoaslsyntaxone>[http://www.jot.fm/issues/issue_2003_01/column1 "UML - Unified or Universal Modeling Language? UML2, OCL, MOF, EDOC - The Emperor Has Too Many Clothes"]</ref><ref name=mdanoaslsyntaxtwo>[http://www.theserverside.com/tt/articles/article.tss?l=MDA_Haywood "MDA: Nice Idea. Shame about the..."]</ref>
* Vendor Lock-in: Although MDA was conceived as an approach for achieving (technical) platform independence, current MDA vendors have been reluctant to engineer their MDA toolsets to be interoperable. Such an outcome could result in vendor lock-in for those pursuing an MDA approach.{{Citation needed|date=February 2007}}
| |||