Affiliation:
1. University of Technology, Australia
2. Uppsala University, Sweden
3. Spanish National Research Council (CSIC), Spain
Abstract
By consideration of scientific paradigm shifts, in this chapter the authors evaluate possible parallels in the evolution of modelling, and particularly metamodelling and modelling language construction, as a basis for evaluating whether or not the time is ripe for a similar change of direction in model language development for software engineering. Having identified several inconsistencies and paradoxes in the current orthodoxy, they then introduce a number of ideas from outside software engineering (including language use, philosophy, and ontology engineering) that seem to solve many of these issues. Whether these new ideas, together, are sufficient to create a shift in mindset or whether they are simply the stimulus for others to create new and orthogonal ideas remains to be seen. The authors urge the modelling and metamodelling communities to search out that new orthodoxy (i.e. instigate a paradigm shift) that will, necessarily, ensure that the science will offer simpler and more satisfying solutions in the years to come.
Reference181 articles.
1. Getting pragmatic
2. Exploring the Concept of Method Rationale
3. Álvarez, J., Evans, A., & Sammut, P. (2001). Mapping between levels in the metamodel architecture. In M. Gogolla, & C. Kobryn (Eds.), Proc. UML 2001 – The Unified Modeling Language: Modeling Languages, Concepts and Tools (LNCS), (vol. 2185, pp. 34-46). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
4. Aristotle. in Translation. (1984). Complete works. (J. Barnes, Ed.). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Cited by
11 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献