Testing Metamodels

Sadilek, Daniel A.; Weißleder, Stephan

doi:10.1007/978-3-540-69100-6_20

Cited by 14 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Current testing approaches for metamodels fall short in a number of ways: For modeling-space sampling (Gomez et al, 2012;Merilinna et al, 2008), a sufficiently specified model under test is needed, which is not available in an iterative development and evolution of domain models. The same holds true for metamodel-test models (i.e., simulating a set of valid instance model alternatives), which require the full domain model under test to be specified (Sadilek and Weißleder, 2008;Cicchetti et al, 2011). Metamodel validation approaches (e.g., model-constraint evaluations) employ formal expression languages (e.g., OCL), but do not consider the structure of non-executable requirements specifications (Merilinna and Pärssinen, 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Natural-language Scenario Descriptions for Testing Core Language Models of Domain-Specific Languages

Hois¹,

Sobernig²,

Strembeck³

2014

Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Model-Driven Engineering and Software Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The core language model is a central artifact of domain-specific modeling languages (DSMLs) as it captures all relevant domain abstractions and their relations. Natural-language scenarios are a means to capture requirements in a way that can be understood by technical as well as non-technical stakeholders. In this paper, we use scenarios for the testing of structural properties of DSML core language models. In our approach, domain experts and DSML engineers specify requirements via structured natural-language scenarios. These scenario descriptions are then automatically transformed into executable test scenarios providing forward and backward traceability of domain requirements. To demonstrate the feasibility of our approach, we used Eclipse Xtext to implement a requirements language for the definition of semi-structured scenarios. Transformation specifications generate executable test scenarios that run in our test platform which is built on the Eclipse Modeling Framework and the Epsilon language family.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Natural-language Scenario Descriptions for Testing Core Language Models of Domain-Specific Languages

Hois¹,

Sobernig²,

Strembeck³

2014

Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Model-Driven Engineering and Software Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To verify the conformance relation, the generated models are then reviewed by the domain experts (see [7]) or processed via platformspecific, application-level input/output data to be tested against corresponding applications (see [8]). A first shortcoming with respect to evolving MUTs is the requirement of an existing and sufficiently specified MUT (see [9]) to generate potential instances. This requirement is not always met in the stepwise development of DSML models.…”

Section: Testing Evolving Core Language Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Another important testing objective is assessing the specification consistency of the interrelated metamodel specifications, for example, consisting of a meta-metamodel instantiation and metamodel constraints expressed using a constraint language such as the Object Constraint Language (OCL) or the Epsilon Validation Language (EVL). An exemplary consistency defect is the risk of contradicting constraint expressions, such as conflicting invariant expressions in boundary cases (see [9]). An inconsistency defect, however, may also hint at requirements inconsistencies (see [16]).…”

Section: Testing Evolving Core Language Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Metamodel-test models: A second research direction (see, e.g., [9], [25]) is based on ideas from model simulation (see [26]) and aims at the manual definition of potential MUT instantiations by domain experts and DSML engineers (see Fig. 1).…”

Section: Testing Evolving Core Language Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Recently, metamodel-testing approaches have been presented (see, e.g., [7]- [9]) to assist in the systematic development of DSMLs and to minimize the risk of late or post-release defects. While such approaches cover important metamodel-testing tasks, they fall short with respect to providing a testing procedure for evolving metamodels.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Requirements-Driven Testing of Domain-Specific Core Language Models Using Scenarios

Sobernig

Hoisl

Strembeck

2013

2013 13th International Conference on Quality Software

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-In this paper, we present an approach for the scenario-based testing of the core language models of domainspecific modeling languages (DSML). The core language model is a crucial artifact in DSML development, because it captures all relevant domain abstractions and specifies the relations between these abstractions. In software engineering, scenarios are used to explore and to define (actual or intended) system behavior as well as to specify user requirements. The different steps in a requirements-level scenario can then be refined through detailed scenarios. In our approach, we use scenarios as a primary design artifact. Non-executable, human-understandable scenario descriptions can be refined into executable test scenarios. To demonstrate the applicability of our approach, we implemented a scenario-based testing framework based on the Eclipse Modeling Framework (EMF) and the Epsilon model-management toolkit.

show abstract

On the Automated Derivation of Domain-Specific UML Profiles

Kraas

2017

Modelling Foundations and Applications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Similar to general-purpose languages, domain-specific languages (DSL) can be developed based on grammar formalisms, the model-driven engineering (MDE) is also becoming more and more important for the development of DSLs. On the one hand, metamodels can be used to define the syntax and semantics of DSLs. On the other hand, a DSL can be realized by adapting the Unified Modeling Language (UML) via the profiling mechanism, i.e., by defining a UML profile. For example, metamodels for a DSL can be created with the language concepts provided by the Meta Object Facility (MOF), distinguishing between the Essential MOF (EMOF) and the Complete MOF (CMOF). The latter variant is based on the EMOF but provides additional language concepts. A higher degree of abstraction and reuse of existing metamodels can be achieved by employing the language concepts provided by CMOF, which can be advantageous for the creation of more complex DSLs. IITo verify and evaluate the presented derivation approach, we have implemented a toolchain that we used to conduct two case studies on the Specification and Description Language (SDL) and the Test Description Language (TDL).IV formationen validiert werden. Neben neu zu entwickelnden DSLs ermöglicht unser Ansatz auch eine Migration bestehender Grammatik-basierter DSLs zu CMOFbasierten Metamodellen, sofern Syntaxregeln existieren.Um den vorgestellten Ableitungsansatz zu überprüfen und zu bewerten, wurde eine Werkzeugkette implementiert, mit der zwei Fallstudien für die Specification and Description Language (SDL) und die Test Description Language (TDL) durchgeführt wurden.

show abstract

Testing Metamodels

Cited by 14 publications

References 9 publications

Natural-language Scenario Descriptions for Testing Core Language Models of Domain-Specific Languages

Natural-language Scenario Descriptions for Testing Core Language Models of Domain-Specific Languages

Requirements-Driven Testing of Domain-Specific Core Language Models Using Scenarios

On the Automated Derivation of Domain-Specific UML Profiles

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About