A Model Driven Approach for Open Distributed Systems using an

Enterprise Architecture Framework

Melanie Langermeier

1,2,3

, Arne-Jørgen Berre

and Bernhard Bauer

Elite Graduate Program Software Engineering, University of Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany

Ludwigs-Maximilian-Universit

at, M

unchen, Germany

Technische Universit

at M

unchen, M

unchen, Germany

SINTEF ICT, Oslo, Norway

Keywords:

Open Distributed Systems, UML, BPMN, Enterprise Architecture Management, Cyber Physical Systems.

Abstract:

Open distributed systems are complex systems, which contain a lot of components provided by different ven-

dors and built with different technologies. The use of well-established and standardized modeling techniques

is one way to deal with the problems that occur in the speciﬁcation and development process of these systems.

Enterprise Architecture Frameworks provide a good foundation to structure the various required modeling

techniques. Existing modeling solutions in the context of Enterprise Architecture Frameworks do not pro-

vide optimal support for the speciﬁcation of open distributed systems. In this paper a coherent MODeling

approach for open distributed systems using an Enterprise Architecture framework (MODEA) is developed.

The approach uses the latest OMG modeling standards. As an enterprise architecture framework the Reference

Model for Open Distributed Systems (RM-ODP) has been chosen. Finally MODEA is illustrated through the

speciﬁcation of two case studies.

1 INTRODUCTION

“An Open Distributed System is made up of compo-

nents that may be obtained from a number of different

sources, which together work as a single distributed

system” (Crowcroft, 1996). Thereby the components

are provided from several vendors and the system

compasses heterogeneous IT resources and multiple

domains. Such distributed, open systems are signif-

icantly more complex than closed, centralized sys-

tems. An increasing scope leads to an increasing

number of involved people and components and often

concludes in a complex deﬁnition of the system and

communication problems (Leist and Zellner, 2006).

Open distributed systems become important because

of an increasing demand on information exchange be-

tween cooperating organizations and a growing need

of interconnect information processing services to

provide the required functionally (ISO/IEC, 2010b).

Examples for open distributed systems are Informa-

tion Systems in the business domain but also Cyber

Physical Systems in the embedded context.

In open distributed systems a lot of different par-

ties have to work together. The issue that “each do-

main has its own description technique” (Lankhorst,

2009) and following “different ﬁelds speak their own

languages, draw their own models, and use their own

techniques and tools” (Lankhorst, 2009) affects the

current practice in architecture speciﬁcation. To avoid

a Babylonian confusion it is important that the various

vendors of the open distributed system agree on one

language used for the speciﬁcation and documenta-

tion of the system (ISO/IEC, 1998a).

The problems in open distributed systems are sim-

ilar with those in Enterprise Architecture where soft-

ware systems of different departments have to work

together to achieve to enterprises’ vision. Therefore

we apply the ideas of EA to open distributed systems.

The purpose of this paper is to create a coher-

ent model driven approach based on existing and

well-established modeling techniques to cope with

the growing complexity and scope of information sys-

tem (Leist and Zellner, 2006). To support the devel-

opment and speciﬁcation process of open distributed

systems metamodel-based modeling techniques and a

well-deﬁned framework is used as basis.

First we describe the requirements and existing

modeling approaches for architecture frameworks.

Then the viewpoints in MODEA are described as

well as the relationships between them. At least

284

Langermeier M., Berre A. and Bauer B..

A Model Driven Approach for Open Distributed Systems using an Enterprise Architecture Framework.

DOI: 10.5220/0004438502840291

In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems (ICEIS-2013), pages 284-291

ISBN: 978-989-8565-61-7

 2013 SCITEPRESS (Science and Technology Publications, Lda.)

the deﬁned approach is applied to two environmental

systems in the cyber physical context for evaluation

purposes. Based on these experiences we compare

MODEA with the existing approaches. This paper

is a short form of the technical report (Langermeier,

2013). More details about the presented approach can

be found there.

2 REQUIREMENTS

In (Langermeier, 2013) several problems in open dis-

tributed systems were identiﬁed based on literature

and the experiences within the case studies. After-

wards requirements for a model driven approach were

speciﬁed which support in coping with these prob-

lems. These requirements are presented brieﬂy in the

following.

A common framework applied with a shared set

of modeling techniques, which is used by all partic-

ipants, provides support for the problems occurring

during the development of open distributed systems.

Such a common framework should be divided into

several viewpoints (Romero et al., 2012) and make

use of metamodel-based modeling techniques, which

are widely accepted and used. The established di-

agrams should be easy to understand but also pow-

erful in their expressions. The use of standards as

well as a sound tool support makes the approach com-

plete. When using several viewpoints it is important

that relationships between them are clearly deﬁned to

keep the overall model consistent. In the best case the

tool also enables model-to-model transformations and

model-to-code transformation to support the develop-

ment process.

Use Cases are often used for determining the re-

quirements of a software system (Anda et al., 2001)

and should be integrated in a coherent modeling ap-

proach. To ensure that the system provides the right

functionality the speciﬁcation of the motivation and of

the requirement is important (Engelsman et al., 2011).

The single components in an open distributed sys-

tem have to be integrated and composed together to

a whole system. A modeling approach for open dis-

tributed systems should support both the decomposi-

tion and composition concept. For an adequate speci-

ﬁcation of them techniques have to be deﬁned to make

the interface and behavior of the components as well

as the interaction between them explicit (Crowcroft,

1996). To capture the variety the modeling approach

has to support different architectural styles and make

the differences between them visible. Moreover the

approach should provide techniques to assign respon-

sibilities to certain architectural elements (ISO/IEC,

1998a).

To support the interoperability of the components

and to gain a ﬂexible architecture a service oriented

architectural style has to be supported by the model-

ing approach (Khoshnevis et al., 2009). The service-

concept enables a common language between the col-

laborators and an adequate separation of concerns.

The approach should allow the speciﬁcation, identiﬁ-

cation and classiﬁcation of service as well as the reuse

of them. Furthermore the approach should support

distribution transparencies. That means that the ap-

proach has to provide mechanisms to explicitly spec-

ify the way the distribution is provided. But also en-

able the abstraction of those for example in the case

when the logical functionality is described (ISO/IEC,

1998a; Coulouris et al., 2005).

3 ARCHITECTURE-RELATED

MODELING APPROACHES

An architecture description facilitates a good commu-

nication in the development projects by providing a

common understanding. Thereby the focus lies on the

main part of the system and its structure; irrelevant

details are hidden (Lankhorst, 2009). The systematic

approach for the establishment of the architecture is

called an architecture framework. Usually a frame-

work contains different viewpoints on a system to en-

able the description of different perspectives (Tang

et al., 2004). Frameworks exist on the software level

as well as on the enterprise level. Through a coherent

description of the different parts of the enterprise ar-

chitecture, it becomes an instrument in controlling the

complexity of enterprises and its processes and sys-

tems (Lankhorst, 2009).

Established architecture frameworks are for exam-

ple Zachman (Zachman, 1987), TOGAF (The Open

Group, 2011), DoDAF in the military domain (U.S.

Department of Defense, 2010), RM-ODP for open

distributed systems (ISO/IEC, 1998a), the FEAF for

US federal agencies and other governmental agencies

(U.S. Executive Ofﬁce, 2012) or the 4+1 View model

of Architecture (Kruchten, 1995; Tang et al., 2004).

In the following three modeling approaches related to

enterprise architectures are presented:

The Uniﬁed proﬁle for DoDAF/MODAF

(UPDM) is a standardized UML proﬁle that supports

both EAF of the military domain. It includes a

service-oriented component modeling with SoaML

and a SysML system modeling to represent the

DoDAF and MODAF architecture views (OMG,

2012b).

UML4ODP is the short name for ISO/IEC 19793,

AModelDrivenApproachforOpenDistributedSystemsusinganEnterpriseArchitectureFramework

285

which deﬁnes a UML proﬁle to model the ﬁve view-

points of RM ODP (ISO/IEC, 2009). UML4ODP is a

very well speciﬁed modeling approach and built com-

pletely upon the formal RM-ODP speciﬁcation. But

this results in over-weighted diagrams at some points.

ArchiMate is a modeling approach for TOGAF.

Its goal is to “provide a graphical language for the rep-

resentation of enterprise architectures over time” (The

Open Group, 2012). ArchiMate is a well-connected

and well-understandable modeling approach. But

main purpose of it is visualization and it is not in-

tended to be used as a language for a model driven de-

velopment with model transformation and code gen-

eration.

All these approaches deﬁne their own modeling

language or UML proﬁle for the architecture descrip-

tion. Although they all enable the speciﬁcation of

architectures with a service-oriented style, some re-

quired concepts like identiﬁcation of services, sup-

port for reuse or classiﬁcation are not well supported.

Additionally especially UML4ODP and UPDM are

very extensive approaches, which are often too com-

plex and over-weighted. Furthermore UPDM con-

tains speciﬁc aspects for the military domain. The

main problem with ArchiMate is, that it is only cre-

ated for visualizing architectures, and not for model

driven development. None of the three modeling ap-

proaches fulﬁlls all of the requirements in the previ-

ous chapter (Langermeier, 2013).

Furthermore in the CEN/TR 15449-4 standard,

which is under approval at the moment, recommen-

dations are provided how to use techniques and tools

to specify a service-centric speciﬁcation in the con-

text of spatial data infrastructures. Thereby it uses

RM ODP for structuring (CEN/TR, 2013). The meth-

ods described in CEN/TR 15449-4 are also adapted

in the working draft for an update of ISO 19119 (ISO

19119, 2013).

4 MODEA

MODEA is an acronym for MODel driven Enterprise

Architecture. The RM-ODP framework, an ISO/IEC

standard in cooperation with ITU-T, is used as under-

lying Enterprise Architecture Framework for it. It is a

framework for specifying and building large or com-

plex systems. The systems dealt within RM ODP

are Open Distributed Processing systems and they

can be amongst others classical IT systems, informa-

tion systems, embedded systems or business systems

(ISO/IEC, 1998a; ISO/IEC, 2010a; ISO/IEC, 2010b;

ISO/IEC, 1998b).

RM ODP was chosen for several reasons: The sin-

gle viewpoints are well-deﬁned using a set of formal

concepts as foundation and a speciﬁc language for

each viewpoint on top of them. The connections be-

tween the viewpoints are deﬁned with little overlap.

These characteristics make RM-ODP a good choice

for our modeling approach (ISO/IEC, 1998a). An-

other reason is the domain independency of the frame-

work and additionally its support for high heteroge-

neous systems. The framework is already used in the

current deliverables of the two pilot cases introduced

in chapter 1. The particular use of RM-ODP in the

two projects in illustrated in (Langermeier, 2013).

4.1 Overview

The concepts described in the RM ODP standard will

be modeled using UML, SoaML, BMM and BPMN.

This follows the recommendation that is given in

CEN/TR 15449-4 (CEN/TR, 2013).

UML is chosen, since it “is the most frequently

used language for visualizing static and dynamic as-

pects of software–intensive systems” (Brown, 2008).

But UML lacks an overarching concept of how to link

the various single diagrams. In MODEA such a link-

ing between the different diagrams with respect to

the speciﬁcation of the RM ODP framework is made.

With the integration of UML into the context of ar-

chitectural modeling, its strong support in tools and

industry, should be earned in the speciﬁcation of open

distributed systems too.

A service-oriented style addresses several of the

identiﬁed problems in open distributed systems. The

Service oriented architecture Modeling Language

(SoaML) is an OMG standardized metamodel and

UML proﬁle that enables the identiﬁcation and spec-

iﬁcation of services as well as deﬁning service con-

sumers and producers. SoaML enables a linking of

services to model elements of the OMG Business Mo-

tivation Model, UML Use Cases and also to process

notations (OMG, 2012a).

The Business Motivation Model BMM is a busi-

ness modeling speciﬁcation, published by the OMG

group, to deﬁne the motivation e.g. “to be able to say

why” (OMG, 2010) for certain business activity. One

advantage of BMM is the very simple deﬁnition, since

the few concepts only have basic attributes and most

of the associations are unconstrained (OMG, 2010).

A lot of modeling tools provide support for require-

ments modeling using the BMM standard and enable

the deﬁnition of links between the elements of BMM

and thus of UML and BPMN.

At least Collaboration and Process Diagrams from

the Business Process Modeling Notation (BPMN) are

chosen as technique for deﬁning business processes.

ICEIS2013-15thInternationalConferenceonEnterpriseInformationSystems

286

This notation is supported in nearly all modeling-

tools, which provide support for UML 2. Further-

more BPMN has two more advantages: The notation

is well known in all domains, from the business users

to the technical developers and it closes the gap be-

tween business process design and its implementation

(OMG, 2011a).

The meta models of each viewpoint in MODEA as

well as an overarching one are shown in the follow-

ing. The concepts of RM ODP serve as orientation

for what to model in which viewpoint. This paper fo-

cuses on how to link the different modeling concepts

of UML, BMM, BPMN and SoaML in the context of

an architecture framework. Further details about the

derivation of these from the RM ODP concepts can be

found in (Langermeier, 2013).

4.2 Enterprise Viewpoint

The Enterprise Viewpoint (EntV) in RM-ODP an-

swers questions about the purpose, the business re-

quirements and the key stakeholders with their inter-

actions (Linington et al., 2011). The purpose and mo-

tivation for the system is shown in a Business Mo-

tivation Model. The requirements of the system are

captured in Use Case templates and their correspond-

ing Business Processes are described using BPMN.

The stakeholders and their interactions with the sys-

tem are shown in an UML Use Case Diagram.

Figure 1 represents a meta model of the elements

and diagrams used in the EntV and how they are con-

nected to each other. From the BMM the higher level

concepts like Vision, Goals, Mission, Strategy and

Business Policy are not shown, because only the low-

level concepts, which implement the higher level ones

have links to elements from the other diagrams.

Business Motivation Model

UML Use Case

BPMN

Figure 1: Concepts used in the Enterprise Viewpoint.

In MODEA the tactics deﬁned in the BMM are

realized by Use Cases. A business rule can also be

realized directly in a Use Case or only indirectly. In

the last case no explicit relationships to other model

elements are possible. If a business rule is realized

in a Use Case it also has effects on the business pro-

cess describing this Use Case. Use Cases, as repre-

sentations of interactions between the stakeholders,

are summarized in a UML Use Case Diagram. The

role a stakeholder plays in a speciﬁc use case is repre-

sented as Actor. The behavior of a use case is deﬁned

through a Business Process using BPMN. The pools

in a Business Process represent the Actors that par-

ticipate in the described Use Case. Furthermore each

use case is linked to use case descriptions containing

detailed requirements, either informally and unstruc-

tured or in a formal style or with pseudo code.

4.3 Information Viewpoint

The Information Viewpoint (IV) in RM-ODP answers

questions about the handled data types as well as their

states and relationships. Furthermore it deals with the

actions in the system and their dependencies to the

data (Linington et al., 2011). In MODEA the data

types with their relationships to each other are de-

scribed using an UML Class diagram, instances of the

data types are described using an UML Object Di-

agram. At least the state of the data and allowable

actions are described using UML state machines and

SoaML Message Types. Figure 2 shows the used dia-

grams in the EntV and how its elements are connected

to each other.

UML Object Diagram

UML Class Diagram

SoaML Message

Type Diagram

UML State Machine

Figure 2: Concepts used in the Information Viewpoint.

Each information object has a speciﬁc type and a

speciﬁc state. The type is represented through instan-

tiation of the object with the corresponding class. The

state is represented through an attribute. The infor-

mation type speciﬁes the possible state changes of an

information object through a linked UML State Ma-

chine. The outgoing transitions in one state represent

the exits that could be used to change the state. Spe-

cial message types can trigger one or more transitions.

4.4 Computational Viewpoint

The Computational Viewpoint (CV) in RM-ODP an-

swers questions about the basic functionality and its

provisioning via service as well as the internal real-

ization of service with components and connectors

(Linington et al., 2011). In MODEA the system at

AModelDrivenApproachforOpenDistributedSystemsusinganEnterpriseArchitectureFramework

287

a high level is speciﬁed using a Service Architec-

ture. Through participants requesting and provid-

ing services the functionality is described. A step-

wise reﬁnement of service contracts and participants

as well as Sequence and Process Diagrams describe

the internal behavior. Therewith the SoaML service-

contract based approach to specify services is used

(Elvesæter et al., 2011). Figure 3 shows the meta-

model for MODEA and is a simpliﬁed meta model of

the used part of SoaML.

BPMN

SoaML

UML Sequence

Diagram

Figure 3: Concepts used in the Computational Viewpoint.

The overall system is described as Service Ar-

chitectures, which contains Participants and the Ser-

vice Contracts between them. The Service Contracts

specify the roles that can be played within the ser-

vice. A role is represented as interface and can be

either a provider or a consumer and a participant will

be bound to this role when interacting with the ser-

vice. An UML Sequence Diagram deﬁnes the interac-

tion behavior of the participating parties in a service.

Thereby the lifelines represent the roles.

A Service Contract can also be composed of other

Service Contracts. These nested Service Contracts

provide a more ﬁne-granular description of the ser-

vice. Such a compound service does not represent an

implementation through calling other services. This

can be speciﬁed in a Participant Architecture or Pro-

cess Diagram. The use of the contract-based approach

for SoaML enables the deﬁnition and usage of pat-

terns (OMG, 2012a).

The participants can be further described through

a service architecture deﬁning how the services are

provided through internal parts or use of other ser-

vices. Another possibility to describe the internal be-

havior of a participant is through the use of a pro-

cess diagram like BPMN. Here the composition of re-

quired services and required internal actions are de-

ﬁned to describe how the functionality is provided.

The mapping of the participants to system compo-

nents and the speciﬁcation of the provider and con-

sumer interfaces are done in the Engineering View-

point.

4.5 Engineering Viewpoint

The Engineering Viewpoint (EngV) in RM-ODP an-

swers questions about how distribution is realized and

how nodes and linking channels are structured. It de-

scribes how the interaction between the objects de-

ﬁned in the CV is achieved and what resources are

required for this, for example discovery services or

request brokers (ISO/IEC, 1998a; Linington et al.,

2011). In MODEA the essential element is the com-

ponent diagram, which describes the system distribu-

tion using components. The communication channels

between the various components are modeled through

the use of ports and assembly connectors, linking re-

quired and provided interfaces. Figure 4 shows the

meta model of the EngV in MODEA.

UML Component

Diagram

New Specification

Behavioral Diagram

Decomposition

UML Sequence

Diagram

Figure 4: Concepts used in the Engineering Viewpoint.

Components can represent Processing Systems,

System Components and Platform Capabilities from

external Platforms. System components provide ap-

plication functionality but also necessary functional-

ity to support the distribution or communication in

the ODP system. For example the replication trans-

parency can be modeled with distributing the repli-

cated system component on two processing systems.

The hierarchical structure of the components is repre-

sented through a composition of them. Components

are connected through ports and interfaces as well as

realization and usage dependencies. The component

diagram enables the speciﬁcation of logical compo-

nents but also physical components. Following a link

to the logical description of the system as well as the

deployment can be made (OMG, 2011b). The inter-

nal behavior of a component can be modeled in two

ways. Either it is described using a behavioral dia-

gram like State Machines or a Process Diagrams or

the structure is further reﬁned through a decomposi-

tion of the component. The service contracts of the

CV are deﬁned more technically in the EngV using

SoaML Service Interfaces or simple UML Interfaces

in case of a one-way service.

ICEIS2013-15thInternationalConferenceonEnterpriseInformationSystems

288

4.6 Technology Viewpoint

The Technology Viewpoint (TV) provides the link be-

tween the other four viewpoints and the real imple-

mentation. It describes the hard- and software com-

ponents as well as possible implemented standards of

the technology components (ISO/IEC, 1998a). In RM

ODP this is mainly done by structuring and linking

’Technology Objects’. In MODEA we use the UML

Deployment Diagram as shown in Figure 5.

UML Deployment Diagram

Figure 5: Concepts used in the Technology Viewpoint.

Each system component, deﬁned in the EngV,

is manifested through an Artifact. Afterwards Arti-

facts are deployed to Nodes, e.g. Applications, Hard-

ware Devices or Communication connections. Stan-

dards are represented as artifacts, since they are “con-

crete elements in the physical world that are the re-

sult of a development process” (OMG, 2011b). A

dependency-connector links the standards to the ap-

propriate nodes.

Despite the Technology Objects and imple-

mentable standards RM ODP also provides concepts

for describing the implementation process and extra

information for conformance testing (IXIT). The con-

cepts related to conformance testing are not examined

in this paper. The implementation process can be de-

scribed using BPMN.

4.7 Relationships between the

Viewpoints

Figure 6 shows the ﬁve different viewpoints with their

relationships between each other. For a better read-

ability the labels between the elements of one view-

point are invisible.

Each use case of the EntV, realizing one or more

tactics, will have a corresponding service in the CV.

The participants providing or requesting service are

in the ﬁrst step derived from the actors and are then

further reﬁned through decomposition. Such a par-

ticipant, a logical element, can be then realized by a

component, a physical element, in the EngV. A ser-

vice, deﬁned by a service contract, fulﬁlls a service

interface of a speciﬁc port in the EngV. This relation-

ship between the EntV, CV and EngV is illustrated by

an example in ﬁgure 7.

The components of the EngV are at least mapped

to processing nodes in the TV using manifestation and

UML Artifacts.

The IV provides a common set of information

types and actions as well as constraints on those. All

the other viewpoints have to be consistent with this

deﬁnition and use these actions to specify interfaces

or information types for information ﬂows.

5 EVALUATION

We applied MODEA in two pilot cases. The ﬁrst case

study is the Personal Environmental Information Sys-

tem (PEIS) from the ENVIROFI Project

. The sec-

ond one is the Oil Spill pilot from the ENVISION

Project

. Both are large, distributed systems where

sensor data, processing services and user interaction

services have to be integrated with as much reuse as

possible. Figure 7 shows excerpts of the Oil Spill pilot

from the EntV to the EngV illustrating the context of

the Cod Effects Prediction. For space reasons we are

not able to present the full case studies in the paper,

they can be found in (Langermeier, 2013).

For modeling we used Sparx System Enterprise

Architect. At least each tool that provides support

for UML 2.0 and BPMN can be used for MODEA.

SoaML is an UML proﬁle and if a modeling tool does

not provide a direct support, it can be easily integrated

through the use of the appropriate stereotypes. Also

BMM, although there is no UML proﬁle, can be eas-

ily used through stereotyping, since there are only a

few simple concepts and associations.

Additionally to the practical application we

compared MODEA with the modeling approaches

UPDM, UML4ODP and ArchiMate based on the de-

ﬁned requirements. Especially in the ﬁelds where the

three other frameworks are weak MODEA contains

concepts to deal with them. These are the use of ex-

isting modeling language standard, the integration of

use cases as well as the possibility of specifying dis-

tribution transparencies. In the case of support for

model transformation and code generation, MODEA

is on the same stage as UPDM and UML4ODP. All

approaches except ArchiMate use metamodel based

modeling techniques.

Environmental Observation Web and its Service Appli-

cations within the Future Internet: www.enviroﬁ.eu

Environmental Services Infrastructure with Ontolo-

gies: www.envision-project.eu

AModelDrivenApproachforOpenDistributedSystemsusinganEnterpriseArchitectureFramework

289

Business

Rule

Business

Process

Template

Objective

Tactic

Information

Type

uses

Use Case

Actor

Information

Object

State Transition

Message

Type

Behavior

Interaction

Behavior

Role

Interface

Service

Contract

Service

Architecture

Composition

Behavior

used in

realized by

types

Service

Interface

Interfaces

Port

Component

Interaction

Behavior

realized by

fulfills

Standard

Node

Artifact

manifested in

Information Viewpoint

Enterprise Viewpoint

Computational Viewpoint

Engineering Viewpoint

Technology

Viewpoint

types

Participant

Figure 6: Meta-model of the relationships between the ﬁve Viewpoints.

realized by

fulfills

types

Enterprise Viewpoint

Computational Viewpoint

Engineering Viewpoint

Figure 7: Excerpts of the Oil Spill Pilot from the Enterprise to the Engineering Viewpoint.

MODEA has a strong support for service-oriented

architectures since SoaML provides support for iden-

tiﬁcation, reuse and the speciﬁcation of services. This

is one point where existing approaches often do not

provide appropriate techniques. With BPMN pro-

cesses and collaborations the composition behavior in

terms of orchestration and choreography can be de-

scribed. Especially ArchiMate and UML4ODP lack

techniques for choreography and orchestration.

For a full support of different architectural styles

in MODEA UML lacks methods for deﬁning com-

munication details between components. For exam-

ple it is not possible to differ between a rest-oriented

communication, a stream-oriented communication,

an event-oriented communication or a simple request

and reply.

With UML, BPMN, SoaML and BMM widely

accepted, standardized, meta-model based languages

are chosen for MODEA. The tool variety for these

languages supports the creation of readable diagrams,

while they keep powerful in their expression. This

point distinguishes MODEA from the three other ap-

proaches since we do not use some proﬁle or a domain

speciﬁc language, which are typically specialized and

only little in use. A detailed listing of the require-

ments and their degree of fulﬁllment in the four mod-

eling approaches can be seen in (Langermeier, 2013).

6 CONCLUSIONS

MODEA is a coherent model driven approach for

specifying and designing enterprise architectures, es-

pecially those of open distributed systems. It is built

upon the enterprise architecture framework RM ODP,

which provides a sound basis of how to structure the

overall speciﬁcation. The concepts of the framework

are modeled using the OMG standard modeling lan-

guages UML, BPMN, SoaML and BMM and with the

integration of a service-oriented architectural style.

These techniques provide a common foundation to

cope with the heterogeneity and complexity and en-

able an effective collaboration between the various

vendors and a ﬂexible, optimized architecture. Al-

though there is a quite good tool support for model-

ing, further work is required to enhance the support

for model transformation and code generation. In the

presented approach a ﬁrst mapping of concepts from

the different viewpoints to each other and possibili-

ties of how to derive one model out of another are

introduced. Further work has to be done to include all

speciﬁcation elements of the used techniques in the

MODEA meta model and to deﬁne formal rules for

model transformation. Finally, concepts have to be

speciﬁed of how to generate code out of these mod-

els.

ICEIS2013-15thInternationalConferenceonEnterpriseInformationSystems

290

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This work was partially sponsered by FuE-Programm

Informations- und Kommunikationstechnik Bayern.

REFERENCES

Anda, B., Sjøberg, D., and Jørgensen, M. (2001). Quality

and understandability of use case models. In Knudsen,

J. L., editor, ECOOP 2001 Object-Oriented Program-

ming, number 2072 in Lecture Notes in Computer Sci-

ence, pages 402–428. Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

Brown, A. W. (2008). MDA redux: Practical realization

of model driven architecture. In 7th International

Conference on Composition-Based Software Systems,

pages 174–183.

CEN/TR (2013). CEN/TR 15449-4: Geographic informa-

tion – Spatial Data Infrastructure (SDI) – Service cen-

tric view. Standard under approval, expected date

available 2013-01.

Coulouris, G., Dollimore, J., and Kindberg, J. (2005). Dis-

tributed Systems, Concepts and Design. Addison Wes-

ley, 4. rev. edition edition.

Crowcroft, J. (1996). Open Distributed Systems. Artech

House.

Elvesæter, B., Berre, A.-J., and Sadovykh, A. (2011). Spec-

ifying Services using the Service oriented architecture

Modeling Language (SoaML): A baseline for Speci-

ﬁcation of Cloud-based Services. In CLOSER 2011,

pages 276–285. SciTePress.

Engelsman, W., Quartel, D., Jonkers, H., and Sinderen,

M. v. (2011). Extending enterprise architecture mod-

elling with business goals and requirements. Enter-

prise Information Systems, 4(3):9–36.

ISO 19119 (2013). ISO 19119: Geographic information

Service. Working draft for international standard.

ISO/IEC (1998a). ITU-T x.901 | ISO/IEC 10746-1: Infor-

mation technology - open distributed processing - ref-

erence model: Overview. International Standard V1.

ISO/IEC (1998b). ITU-T x.901 | ISO/IEC 10746-4: Infor-

mation technology - open distributed processing - ref-

erence model: Architectural semantics. International

Standard V1.

ISO/IEC (2009). ITU-T recommendation x.906 | ISO/IEC

19793: Information technology open distributed pro-

cessing use of UML for ODP system speciﬁcations.

International standard.

ISO/IEC (2010a). ITU-T x.901 | ISO/IEC 10746-2: Infor-

mation technology - open distributed processing - ref-

erence model: Foundations. Final Draft International

Standard V01.04.

ISO/IEC (2010b). ITU-T x.901 | ISO/IEC 10746-3: Infor-

mation technology - open distributed processing - ref-

erence model: Architecture. Final Draft International

Standard V01.04.

Khoshnevis, S., Shams Aliee, F., and Jamshidi, P. (2009).

Model driven approach to service oriented enterprise

architecture. In IEEE Asia-Paciﬁc Services Comput-

ing Conference, pages 279–286.

Kruchten, P. (1995). The 4+1 view model of architecture.

IEEE Software, 12(6):42–50.

Langermeier, M. (2013). A model-driven approach for open

distributed systems. Technical Report 2013-03, Uni-

versity of Augsburg.

Lankhorst, M. (2009). Enterprise Architecture at Work:

Modelling, Communication and Analysis. Springer,

2 edition.

Leist, S. and Zellner, G. (2006). Evaluation of current archi-

tecture frameworks. In Proceedings of the 2006 ACM

symposium on Applied computing, pages 1546–1553.

ACM Press.

Linington, P. F., Milosevic, Z., Tanaka, A., and Vallecillo,

A. (2011). Building enterprise systems with ODP an

introduction to Open Distributed Processing. CRC

Press, Boca Raton, FL.

OMG (2010). Business motivation model. OMG Speciﬁca-

tion V 1.1.

OMG (2011a). Business process modeling notation. OMG

Speciﬁcation V 2.0.

OMG (2011b). Uniﬁed modeling language superstructure.

OMG Speciﬁcation V 2.4.1.

OMG (2012a). Service oriented architecture modeling lan-

guage. OMG Speciﬁcation V 1.0.

OMG (2012b). Uniﬁed proﬁle for DoDAF and MODAF

(UPDM). OMG Speciﬁcation V 2.0.

Romero, J. R., Jan, J. I., and Vallecillo, A. (2012). A tool

for the model-based speciﬁcation of open distributed

systems. The Computer Journal.

Tang, A., Han, J., and Chen, P. (2004). A comparative

analysis of architecture frameworks. In 11th Asia-

Paciﬁc Software Engineering Conference, pages 640–

647. IEEE.

The Open Group (2011). TOGAF Version 9.1. Van Haren

Publishing.

The Open Group (2012). ArchiMate 2.0 speciﬁcation :

Open Group Standard. Van Haren Publishing.

U.S. Department of Defense (2010). The dodaf archi-

tecture framework version 2.02. in: http://dodcio.

defense.gov/dodaf20.aspx, accessed 09/04/2013.

U.S. Executive Ofﬁce (2012). Federal enterprise architec-

ture. in: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/e-gov/fea/,

accessed 09/04/2013.

Zachman, J. A. (1987). A framework for information archi-

tecture. IBM System Journal, 26(3):276–295.

AModelDrivenApproachforOpenDistributedSystemsusinganEnterpriseArchitectureFramework

291