Re: [ubl-dev] Réf. : Re: [ubl-dev] RE: UML meta-modeling of UN/CEFACT Core Components

["Anders W. Tell" <opensource@toolsmiths.se>]

Bruno TRAVERSON wrote:

> ***
>
>*** from a practical point of view, I think you are right. Spreadsheets
>*** are probably the best formalism for "common" humans ;-)
>*** but, from a standardization point of view, we are faced to the fact that
>*** UN/CEFACT standard is expressed in UML and OASIS standard has chosen
>*** XML. What kind of solutions do you suggest to keep the specifications
>*** aligned? I was suggesting meta-modeling. To generalize a little, it
>should be nice to have tools that translate in a bidirectional way UML, XML
>and spreadsheet specifications not only at the instance level but also at
>the model level.
>

This is what we have been creating up North: The link below shows the 
result of having applied an XSLT transformation to an XML file, an Core 
Component Interchange Formated file.
<http://www.toolsmiths.se/data/information/generatedLibrary_details.html>

We can generate the XML file from / to a spreadsheet, or UML (MagicDraw) 
etc. It is a very useful and powerfull idea.

We have also used JAXB to generate *all* code to read and write SFTI 
eInvoice (an UBL derivate) and we are also working on Core Component 
Objects so a poor programmer can focus on business semantics directly 
instead of classnames:)

All in all code generation integration with UML is both possible and 
desirable.

thanks
/anders
Business Collaboration Toolsmiths