I agree mostly with
Scott Ambler’s assessment. See below for a more detailed analysis. I do
not agree that MDA does not have a test-driven approach. That is just a
lack of architecture discipline and customer
focus.
This link explains
what a good UML modeling process is. You have to create three modeling
methodologies (Domain, System, Design) and then cross check for consistency
and extensibility (change case???) in the plethora of generated models.
This paper outlines the requirements for high quality modeling.
http://www.inferdata.com/resources/whitepapers/WP.HQModeling.pdf
Even if you do all of
the above, you still have some problems outlined in the following paper.
http://www.clearviewtraining.com/literatemodeling/literatemodeling.pdf
The above paper is
really Chapter Three of Enterprise Patterns and
MDA
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/032111230X/qid=1077751470/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/104-5550600-7933542?v=glance&s=books
My take from Chapter
Three of the book follows:
UML Model Visual
Formalisms are too complex for Business Domain Experts à need simpler
formalisms for design by contract to work
UML Models are
divorced from the Business Context Document but they try to use UML Tags to
link the CMS with the Model repository à this means you are
going to take a dive into XMI for automated traceability and test
generation. Round Tripping is problematic and high skilled at
best.
Business context that
gives rise to a set of business requirements that is not well captured or
explained by use cases or by ANY UML Model
UML doesn’t provide
built in support for linking models to external documents. This can be
done using UML extension mechanism called tagged
values.
RosettaNet resorted
to tagging comments and then transforming XMI using XSLT. I suggest
using Prozac Nation as your programming manual for
this.
This is not a good
model because free text annotations, notes and constraints are spread through
the UML model. This bumps into intentional programming
.
It looks like the
JBOSS folks and Microsoft are both on this
vector.
http://techupdate.zdnet.com/techupdate/stories/main/Charles_Simonyi_creates_software_intentionally.html
The above are the
links I promised in the conference call on the book. I also attached the
Forum9000 Paper on Predicting Mass Cooperation and Complex Adaptive
Systems.
However, I am holding
off on the Digital Bag paper as I am integrating some of the above concepts
into CAM and a collaboration editor. I
am struggling with the appropriate levels of abstraction through the CAM
Template Generation, the CAM Digital Bag Generation and the Linking and
Switching of Choice Points at RunTime in executing a Digital Bag.
OpenEHR and others in the medical community have struggled with
the appropriate concrete levels of abstraction. It looks like Archtypes
are all the rage this year since most people don’t understand UML Profiles.
The good news is that Inferdata’s book Design by Contract by Example is
starting to sell well. Guess the time is right.
<Dan/>
From: David
RR Webber [mailto:david@drrw.info]
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2004 1:22
PM
To: BCM OASIS
Subject: [bcm] BCM and Agile Model-Driven
Development
Message text written by
TechNews
>"Are You Ready for MDA?"
Model-Driven Architecture (MDA) is
touted to be applicable to a wide-range
of development tasks by
vendor-backed organizations and modeling experts,
but other software
development thinkers understand MDA has serious flaws.
MDA relies on
complex modeling tools to transform platform-independent ...
http://www.acm.org/technews/articles/2004-6/0225w.html#item13
<
Seems to me that BCM
inherently supports Agile MDD.
Do we have any contacts into the
AMDD community?
=====================================
"Are
You Ready for MDA?"
Software Development (02/20/04); Ambler, Scott W.
Model-Driven Architecture (MDA) is touted to be applicable to a wide-range
of development tasks by vendor-backed organizations and modeling experts, but
other software development thinkers understand MDA has serious flaws. MDA
relies on complex modeling tools to transform platform-independent models into
platform-specific models and then finally into the end-result working system.
All the models are built using Unified Modeling Language (UML) from the Object
Management Group, which also created MDA. Despite the advertised benefits of
MDA tools, organizations need to carefully examine their needs and resources
before attempting to use the architecture: First, only a very small percentage
of software developers are adept modelers, meaning that organizations either
have to train existing developers or hire expertise, which is likely to be in
high demand; second, abstract models and UML are not well understood by
business stakeholders and difficult to learn, which prevents users from being
actively involved in system specification, as opposed to the simpler tools and
techniques advocated in user-centered design. MDA technology itself may prove
a problem as a preferred tool may not work on the platform at hand, and is
really not appropriate for business application development. Additionally, MDA
tools at this point almost always lose data when sharing models between them,
thus leading to vendor lock-in. Finally, MDA does not have a test-driven
approach similar to test-driven development used in programming-based
development. These limiting factors mean MDA is actually useful for just a
small number of companies who have adequate skills and job requirements; Agile
Model-Driven Development, which does not rely on complex modeling tools but
requires thoughtful planning, is a much better model-based approach.