LiquidML: A Web Modeling Language Supporting Fast Metamodel Evolution

Esteban Robles Luna, Julián A. García-García, Gustavo Rossi, José Matías Rivero, Francisco Domínguez Mayo, María José Escalona


Model Driven development approaches are being adopted by the software industry due to a core set of benefits such as raising the level of abstraction and reducing coding errors. However, their underlying modelling languages tend to be quite rigid, making their evolution hard, specifically when the corresponding metamodel do not support primitives and/or functionalities required in specific business domains. In this work, we present an approach for fast evolution of the modelling language that is “self reflective”, allowing modellers to abstract new language concepts from the primitives. The main advantage of our approach is that it provides zero application downtime and automatic tool evolution. As a consequence, applications created with our approach are able to adapt quicker to the business needs than those based on traditional Web modelling languages. We compare our approach with existing modelling languages in a case study providing a proof of its ability to adapt faster than to new business needs.


  1. Blair G., Bencomo N., France R. B., "Models@ run.time," Computer, vol. 42, no. 10, pp. 22-27, October, 2009.
  2. Ceri S, Fraternali P, Bongio A. Web Modeling Language (WebML): a modeling language for designing Web sites. Comput. Networks, vol.33, pp.137-157, 2000.
  3. Cicchetti A., Di Ruscio D., Eramo R., and Pierantonio A. Automating Co-evolution in Model-Driven Engineering. In Proceedings of the 2008 12th International IEEE Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, 222-231.
  4. EMF. Website: Last access: 2016.
  5. Escalona M.J. and Aragon G., “NDT. A Model-Driven Approach for Web Requirements,” IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng., vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 377-390, May 2008.
  6. Escalona MJ, Garcia-Garcia JA, Mas F, Oliva M, Valle C. Applying model-driven paradigm: CALIPSOneo experience. Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering 2013, vol.1017, pp. 25-32. 2013.
  7. Executable models vs code-generation vs model interpretation. Website: executable-models-vs-code-generation-vs-model- inter pretation-2/. Last access: 2016.
  8. García-García J.A., MJ Escalona, F Domínguez-Mayo, A. Salido. “NDT-Suite: A metodological tool solution in the Model-Driven Engineering Paradigm”. DOI: 10.4236/jsea.2014.74022. 2014.
  9. GWT. Development toolkit. Website: www.gwtproject. org. Last access: 2016.
  10. Hohpe G. and Woolf B., Enterprise Integration Patterns: Designing, Building, and Deploying Messaging Solutions. Addison-Wesley Professional, 2003, p. 736.
  11. Hoisl B., Hidaka S., Hu Z., Towards Co-Evolution in Model-driven Development via Bidirectional HigherOrder Transformation. 2nd International Conference on Model-Driven Engineering and Software Development (MODELSWARD) 2014.
  12. Mellor SJ, Balcer M. Executable UML: A Foundation for Model-Driven Architectures. Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing, Inc., Boston, MA, USA. 2002.
  13. New Relic. Website: Last access 2016.
  14. Open weather map. Website: Last access: 2016.
  15. Pastor O, España S, Panach JI, Aquino, N. Model-driven development. Informatik-Spektrum, 31(5), 394-407. 2008.
  16. The Enterprise Architect. Website: http://www. 2010/ 06/ 28/ modeldriven-development-code- generation- or- model- inter pretation. Last access: 2016.
  17. Toffetti G. Web engineering for cloud computing (web engineering forecast: cloudy with a chance of opportunities). In Proceedings of the 12th international conference on Current Trends in Web Engineering. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 5- 19 2012.
  18. Robles E, Rivero JM, Urbieta M, Cabot J. Improving the scalability of Web applications with runtime transformations” in Proceedings of the 14th International Conference in Web Engineering. 2014.
  19. Wimmer M, Schauerhuber A, Kargl H. On the Integration of Web Modeling Languages: Preliminary Results and Future Challenges. Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Model-Driven Web Engineering, 2007.
  20. Webratio. Website: Last access: 2016.
  21. JQuery. Website: Last access: 2016.
  22. Schmidt DC. Model-Driven Engineering. IEEE Computer, Computer Society, vol. 39, no. 2, pp. 25-31, 2006.

Paper Citation

in Harvard Style

Luna E., García-García J., Rossi G., Rivero J., Mayo F. and Escalona M. (2016). LiquidML: A Web Modeling Language Supporting Fast Metamodel Evolution . In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Web Information Systems and Technologies - Volume 1: APMDWE, (WEBIST 2016) ISBN 978-989-758-186-1, pages 318-326. DOI: 10.5220/0005927603180326

in Bibtex Style

author={Esteban Robles Luna and Julián A. García-García and Gustavo Rossi and José Matías Rivero and Francisco Domínguez Mayo and María José Escalona},
title={LiquidML: A Web Modeling Language Supporting Fast Metamodel Evolution},
booktitle={Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Web Information Systems and Technologies - Volume 1: APMDWE, (WEBIST 2016)},

in EndNote Style

JO - Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Web Information Systems and Technologies - Volume 1: APMDWE, (WEBIST 2016)
TI - LiquidML: A Web Modeling Language Supporting Fast Metamodel Evolution
SN - 978-989-758-186-1
AU - Luna E.
AU - García-García J.
AU - Rossi G.
AU - Rivero J.
AU - Mayo F.
AU - Escalona M.
PY - 2016
SP - 318
EP - 326
DO - 10.5220/0005927603180326