![](bga.png)
does not depend on any kind of concrete syntax, so
that the introduction of a notation will be straightfor-
ward, even more so as the framework language lends
itself to a graphical notation. The wizard mentioned
above could also help in this regard by creating a
graphical editor for a DSL based on a generic edi-
tor. Furthermore, it might be worthwhile to explore if
the general approach taken in this paper—creating a
framework from which to derive DSLs—can be trans-
ferred to other aspects of system modeling, for exam-
ple requirements modeling, where DSLs play an im-
portant role as well.
REFERENCES
Becker, J., Algermissen, L., Pfeiffer, D., and R
¨
ackers, M.
(2007). Local, participative process modelling - the
PICTURE-approach. In Proc. of the 1st International
Workshop on Management of Business Processes in
Government (BPMGOV).
Becker, J., Breuker, D., Pfeiffer, D., and R
¨
ackers, M.
(2009a). Constructing comparable business process
models with domain specific languages - an empirical
evaluation. In 17th European Conference on Informa-
tion Systems (ECIS), pages 1–13.
Becker, J., Weiss, B., and Winkelmann, A. (2009b). Devel-
oping a business process modeling language for the
banking sector - a design science approach. In Proc.
of the 15th Americas Conference on Information Sys-
tems (AMCIS).
Brahe, S. and Østerbye, K. (2006). Business process model-
ing: Defining domain specific modeling languages by
use of UML profiles. In Model Driven Architecture –
Foundations and Applications, pages 241–255.
Dumas, M. and ter Hofstede, A. (2001). UML activity dia-
grams as a workflow specification language. In UML
2001 — The Unified Modeling Language. Modeling
Languages, Concepts, and Tools, pages 76–90.
Heitkoetter, H. (2011). Transforming PICTURE to BPMN
2.0 as part of the model-driven development of elec-
tronic government systems. In Proc. of the 44th
Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences
(HICSS 2011).
Karow, M., Pfeiffer, D., and R
¨
ackers, M. (2008). Empirical-
based construction of reference models in public ad-
ministrations. In Multikonferenz Wirtschaftsinfor-
matik 2008. Referenzmodellierung, pages 1613–1624.
Krahn, H., Rumpe, B., and V
¨
olkel, S. (2008). MontiCore:
Modular development of textual domain specific lan-
guages. In Proc. of TOOLS EUROPE.
Margaria, T. and Steffen, B. (2004). Lightweight coarse-
grained coordination: a scalable system-level ap-
proach. International Journal on Software Tools for
Technology Transfer, 5(2-3):107–123.
Matzner, M., Voigt, M., Alexandrini, F., Araujo, T. S., and
Becker, J. (2009). Process modelling in brazilian pub-
lic administrations: The domain-specific PICTURE
approach. In 15th Americas Conference on Informa-
tion Systems (AMCIS).
Mernik, M., Heering, J., and Sloane, A. M. (2005). When
and how to develop domain-specific languages. ACM
Computing Surveys, 37(4):316–344.
OASIS Standard (2007). Web Services Business Process
Execution Language Version 2.0.
Object Management Group (2008). Meta Object Facility
(MOF) 2.0 Query/View/Transformation specification.
Object Management Group (2010). UML 2.3 superstructure
specification.
Object Management Group (2011). Business Process
Model and Notation 2.0 specification.
Recker, J. (2010). Opportunities and constraints: the current
struggle with BPMN. Business Process Management
Journal, 16(1):181–201.
Recker, J., Indulska, M., Rosemann, M., and Green, P.
(2010). The ontological deficiencies of process mod-
eling in practice. European Journal of Information
Systems, 19(5):501–525.
Recker, J. C., Rosemann, M., Indulska, M., and Green, P.
(2009). Business process modeling : a comparative
analysis. Journal of the Association for Information
Systems, 10(4):333–363.
Spinellis, D. (2001). Notable design patterns for domain-
specific languages. The Journal of Systems and Soft-
ware, 56(1):91–99.
Steffen, B. and Margaria, T. (1999). METAFrame in prac-
tice: Design of intelligent network services. In Cor-
rect System Design, LNCS 1710, pages 390–415.
Steffen, B., Margaria, T., Nagel, R., J
¨
orges, S., and
Kubczak, C. (2007). Model-driven development with
the jABC. In Proc. of the 2nd International Haifa Ver-
ification Conference (HVC).
Steinberg, D., Budinsky, F., Paternostro, M., and Merks,
E. (2009). EMF: Eclipse Modeling Framework, 2nd
Edition. Addison-Wesley Longman.
van Deursen, A., Klint, P., and Visser, J. (2000). Domain-
specific languages: An annotated bibliography. ACM
SIGPLAN Notices, 35(6):26–36.
Voelter, M. (2010). Implementing feature variability for
models and code with projectional language work-
benches. In Proceedings of the 2nd International
Workshop on Feature-Oriented Software Develop-
ment, pages 41–48.
ICSOFT2012-7thInternationalConferenceonSoftwareParadigmTrends
136