Re: [mdr-users] Clustering the UML for Traceability

Hi Martin, since the tracing metamodel is so small (only one reference
to ModelElement) this sounds feasible.  However, I have no idea how
the clustered import and the references should look like in XMI.

Does anybody have an example of this?  It doesn't need to be minimal. 
Attachment size is not an issue if you mail me personally.  Perhaps
there's even an online example that I don't know of?

Thanks a lot in advance,
Pieter.

On 7/19/05, Martin Matula <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hm. This will be difficult. The simplest way to model this is probably
> to add ModelElement to your metamodel, create it in UML profile for MOF
> (without the UML definition), trasform it to MOF and then add the
> clustered import and replace references from your ModelElement to UML
> Model Element manually.
> Martin
> 
> Pieter Van Gorp wrote:
> 
> >Hi,
> >I want to use a minimal metamodel for storing traceability
> >information.  Right now, I only use two MOF classes: Trace and Node.
> >The node class has an attribute "role" of type String and an attribute
> >"content" whose type is the superclass of the metamodel of the
> >language for modeling applications.  In the case of UML, this is
> >ModelElement.
> >
> >The UML models need to be stored in plain UML-XMI.  Therefore, I think
> >my "Tracing" metamodel needs to cluster the UML metamodel.  Hence my
> >question: how do I represent the UML 1.4 metamodel in the UML profile
> >for MOF?  On the NetBeans MM site, I could not find the UML-XMI
> >defining the UML metamodel but only the MOF-XMI.  Then again, I don't
> >know if the UML profile for MOF actually requires the UML definition
> >of all clustered metamodels... perhaps I can use an empty package with
> >the proper tags on it as a stub for "the" actual UML metapackage?
> >
> >Are there any examples of clustering the UML?  If not, could you
> >please help me creating such an example?
> >
> >Thanks a lot in advance,
> >
> >
> 
>