A template-based analysis of the GRL EMMSAD 2005, june 13-14, Porto Gautier Dallons, Patrick Heymans, Isabelle Pollet University of Namur (Belgium) PRECISE.

A template-based analysis of the GRLEMMSAD 2005, june 13-14, Porto

A template-based analysis of the GRLEMMSAD 2005, june 13-14, Porto

Gautier Dallons, Patrick Heymans, Isabelle Pollet

University of Namur (Belgium)PRECISE research lab

www.info.fundp.ac.be/PRECISE

We thank Andreas L. Opdahl and

OutlineOutline

• Context: UEML and InterOP

• Objectives

• Template

• GRL

• Applying the template to GRL

• Observations and findings

• Summary of contributions

• Future work

UEML and InterOPwww.interop-noe.org


• Enterprise Modelling (EM) modelling the various aspects of the enterprise

• processes, resources, organisational structure, information and information flows, strategy,...

for various purposes• developing supporting IS, simulation, planning, decision making,

training,...• support enterprise interoperabilty and integration

• Current situation : tower a Babel many languages, many tools

• Consequence : interoperability, integration and shared enterprise knowledge difficult to attain



• UEML Unified Enterprise Modelling Language An intermediate language that supports

• integration and transformation of enterprise models• maintaining global consistency across models and tools

• Past: UEML 1.0 (2003, UEML project) small pilot project focus on process integrates 3 EMLs: GRAI [Doumeingts], EEML

[Jorgensen&Carlsen] and IEM [Mertins&Jochem] used ad-hoc DB-inspired integration approach



• Present: towards UEML 2.0 started in 2004 as one of the activities of InterOP NoE larger and distributed settings long term iterative and incremental process

RequirementsRequirements LanguagesLanguages

ApproachesApproaches

integrated throughdeterminechoice and

improvement of

determinechoice of



• Current task Find out constructs of different languages that are

suitable for modelling the same real-world things

Approach: based on template by Opdahl and

Henderson-Sellers

Current shortlist of languages being studied:

UML 2.0, GRL, XPDL, BPMN, IDEF3,

ISO/DIS 19440, Coloured Petri Nets

Objectivesof this paper

Objectivesof this paper

• Report on template-based definition of GRL 1st iteration

• Why GRL ? Goals are an important aspect of the enterprise

Goal modelling is currently missing in the UEML

GRL integrates i* and NFR

GRL is expected to become popular

GRL has a public specification

Template[Opdahl & Henderson-Sellers, 2004]


• Purpose structured text-based way of defining the syntax

and semantics of modeling languages for further analysis, comparison, integration,...

• Advantages distributed work simple to use tailorability and extensibility

• Limitations no visualisation, no overall picture



• Template fields (per modelling construct) (1/2)

Preamble1. Construct name

2. Alternative construct names

3. Which language the construct is part of

4. Language acronym and references (URI/other)

5. Which diagram types the construct is used in

6. Diagram type acronym and references (URI/other)

Syntax definition1. Icon/line style (lexical information)

2. User-definable attributes

3. Relationships to other constructs– Same diagram type– Same language, other diagram types

4. Cardinality restrictions

5. Layout conventions



• Template fields (2/2)

Semantics (in terms of BWW-Ontology)

1. Which instantiation level is the modelling construct intended to

represent?

2. Which class of things is it intended to represent?

3. Which properties is it intended to represent, if any?

Which relationships is it intended to represent, if any?

4. Which states, events and processes is it intended to represent, if any?

5. Which modality (permission, recommendation etc) is is intended to

represent?

1. Open issues



For eachconstruct

For eachconstruct

Inst levelInst level

SegmentSegment

OntologicalClass

OntologicalClass

OntologicalProperty

OntologicalProperty

RepresentedClass

RepresentedClass

RepresentedProperty

RepresentedProperty

Represented event

Represented event

Ontologicalstate

Ontologicalstate

Ontological event

Ontological event

Shared ontology

Shared ontology

Representedstate

Representedstate

ModalityModality

GRL 3.0www.usecasemaps.org/urn


• Goal-oriented Requirements Language aka ITU standard URN-NFR

• Originates from NFR (Chung) and i* (Yu)

• 4 categories of concepts in GRL Actor

intentional elements• Goal, Softgoal, Task, Resource and Belief

links (intentional relationships)• Dependency, Decomposition, Means-end,

Contibution, Correlation

non-intentional elements• references to non-GRL model elements



• GRL 3.0 specification consists of 3 concrete syntaxes

• textual syntax (in BNF)• graphical syntax (in BNF + topological information)• XML syntax (as an XML DTD)

informal semantics examples of GRL models a tutorial

• No abstract syntax (meta-model)



Example(from [Yu])Example(from [Yu])

Applying the template to GRLExample: Goal


ActiveThingActiveThing StateLawStateLaw

GoalGoal

”Actor”0:1

”Actor”0:1

”Goal”1:1

”Goal”1:1

ThingThing

{instance, type}{instance, type}

Life timeLife time

”Attribute”0:n

”Attribute”0:n

AnyRegularProperty

AnyRegularProperty

”Dependency”0:n

”Dependency”0:n

TransformationLaw

TransformationLaw

”Means-end”0:n

”Means-end”0:n

”Decomposition”0:n


LawLaw

Wished by actorif any


PropertyProperty

isHeldByrepresents

isDependumOf

hasAttribute isSubElementIn isEndIn

Applying the template to GRLApplying the template to GRL

• Some sample BWW definitions: “A state law is a law that constrains the values that other properties

can have for individual states the thing can be in, i.e., state laws are

structural/static.”

“A transformation law is a law that constrains the values that other

properties can have across multiple states, i.e., transformation laws

are behavioural/dynamic.”

“One thing acts on another thing if and only if the history of the second

thing would have been different had the first thing not existed.”

“We say that one thing is acted on by another thing if and only if the

second thing acts on the first.”



• Some of the issues raised

A Goal is not always held by an Actor !

• whose goal is it if it is not ?

Are Actors humans or can they be other things (computer-

systems, organisational units,...)?

Specific individuals or classes? Roles ?

Whose properties does the state law constrain?

• the future system ? the current system ? the overall organisation ?



ActiveThingActiveThing StateLawStateLaw

GoalGoal

”Actor”0:1

”Actor”0:1

”Goal”1:1

”Goal”1:1

ThingThing

{instance, type}{instance, type}

Life timeLife time

”Attribute”0:n

”Attribute”0:n

AnyRegularProperty

AnyRegularProperty

”Dependency”0:n

”Dependency”0:n

TransformationLaw

TransformationLaw

”Means-end”0:n

”Means-end”0:n



LawLaw



”FutureSystem”

1:1

”FutureSystem”

1:1

ActedOnThing

ActedOnThing

PropertyProperty

isHeldBy

represents isDependumOf

hasAttribute isSubElementIn isEndInisAbout



• Some of the issues raised (cont’s)

According to the syntax, Goal can also be the source (depender) or

target (dependee) of a Dependency.

What does it mean ?

• the attainment of that goal depends or is depended on by ‘something’ ?

overlap with the semantics of Contribution and Correlation

what can that ‘something’ be ?

• the actor depends on ‘something’ for the attainment of that goal

what if there is no holding actor ?

what can that ‘something’ be ?

• ... ?

Applying the template to GRL Overview


GRL construct BWW represented class

BWW represented property

Actor ActiveThing -

Goal - StateLaw

Task - TransformationLaw

Softgoal - StateLaw

Resource ActedOnThing -

Belief - StateLaw

Filled in template: 2-3 pages per construct



GRL construct BWW represented class

BWW represented property

Means-end - TransformationLaw

Dependency - StateLaw

Decomposition - TransformationLaw

Contribution - MutualProperty

Correlation - MutualProperty

Observations and findingsObservations and findings

Template-based definition required high degree of subjectivity

• essentially because GRL spec is imprecise

Many dark spots in GRL• central constructs without or with vague semantics

e.g. goal, actor, dependency

• true of secondary construct too e.g. « short-hands »

• contradictions between the various concrete syntaxes• parts of the syntax are not very intuitive

e.g. DECOMPOSITION <ID> FROM <SUB-EL>TO <COMPOUND-EL>

better: DECOMPOSITION <ID> OF <COMPOUND-EL>INTO <SUB-EL>

Observations and findingsObservations and findings

Using the template was easy• short tutorial (1h) + examples enough to start

• took 4 days to complete

Getting into BWW was harder• but the template helped gain familiarity with BWW

BWW too general to discriminate between GRL constructs• e.g. Goal, Softgoal, Belief and Dependency all have StateLaw as

a BWW represented property

• informal justifications and open issues in template are as important as represented classes and properties

Many repetitive tasks in filling in the template

Summary of contributionsSummary of contributions

• Made abstract syntax (meta-model) of GRL explicit

• Made (a tentative) semantic of GRL explicit

• Discovered problems in current version of GRL

• Discovered limits in current version of template

Future workFuture work

• 2nd iteration Add new classes and properties to BWW

• toward an enterprise-specific version of the ontology

Complete template-based definition of GRL• discuss results with GRL users and ITU to seek consensus• use more specific BWW classes and properties• issues not addressed yet: Contribution and Correlation

subtypes in GRL

Future workFuture work

• Complete definitions of other EMLs

• Compare definitions of EMLs

• Integrate into the UEML

• Tool support for template usage collaborative editing and management of templates

repository

automate comparisons of EMLs

visualisation

import meta-models (if they exist)

...

A template-based analysis of the GRL EMMSAD 2005, june 13-14, Porto Gautier Dallons, Patrick Heymans, Isabelle Pollet University of Namur (Belgium) PRECISE.

Documents

ueml grl

template fields

choice of slide

modelling construct

templatebased analysis

grl observations

popular grl

nfr grl