Architectural Ecosystem (AE)Architectural Ecosystem (AE)AB SIGAB SIG

IntroductionIntroduction

Cory CasanaveCory CasanaveObject Management GroupObject Management Group

Model Driven SolutionsModel Driven Solutions

Speaker IntroductionSpeaker Introduction Cory CasanaveCory Casanave

Co-Chair of Architecture Ecosystem SIGCo-Chair of Architecture Ecosystem SIG OMG Board Of DirectorsOMG Board Of Directors DAS – Open Government Vocabularies WorkgroupDAS – Open Government Vocabularies Workgroup CEO Model Driven Solutions – Architectural services for CEO Model Driven Solutions – Architectural services for

closing the gap between business and technologyclosing the gap between business and technology Enterprise, Business, System and System of Systems Enterprise, Business, System and System of Systems

architectures, Service Oriented, Integration, Business process architectures, Service Oriented, Integration, Business process and Information and Information ArchitecturesArchitectures, Semantic Web, Executable , Semantic Web, Executable Model Driven Architectures, AnalyticsModel Driven Architectures, Analytics

Founder – Modeldriven.org, open source community for Founder – Modeldriven.org, open source community for executable modeling and model integrationexecutable modeling and model integration

Contact: cory-c at modeldriven dot comContact: cory-c at modeldriven dot com

The OMG is the leading consensus standards The OMG is the leading consensus standards organization for modeling, model driven architecture and organization for modeling, model driven architecture and distributed computing with over 500 membersdistributed computing with over 500 members

Standards includeStandards include UML (Unified Modeling Language)UML (Unified Modeling Language) UPDM (DODAF/MODAF in UML)UPDM (DODAF/MODAF in UML) BPMN (Business Process Modeling Notation)BPMN (Business Process Modeling Notation) SoaML (Service Oriented Architecture Modeling Language)SoaML (Service Oriented Architecture Modeling Language) Corba (Common Object Request Broker)Corba (Common Object Request Broker) MOF (Meta Object Facility)MOF (Meta Object Facility) FSAM (Federal Segment Architecture Methodology)FSAM (Federal Segment Architecture Methodology)

Problem: Fragmented Architecture Problem: Fragmented Architecture DomainsDomains

Proposal: Unified Proposal: Unified ArchitecturesArchitectures

Multiple Stakeholder Multiple Stakeholder ViewpointsViewpoints

Different stakeholders need

different views of the same information

Semantically Federating Semantically Federating Multiple Viewpoints and Multiple Viewpoints and

StandardsStandards

AESIG ObjectivesAESIG Objectives

The full value of modeling and architecture is achieved by understanding The full value of modeling and architecture is achieved by understanding and defining systems from many perspectives (viewpoints)and defining systems from many perspectives (viewpoints)

““Systems” are inclusive of the enterprise, business architectures, information Systems” are inclusive of the enterprise, business architectures, information systems architectures, software, processes, rules, services and information.systems architectures, software, processes, rules, services and information.

Systems include “systems of systems” at the macro levelSystems include “systems of systems” at the macro level Systems are not insular, they are composed of and interact with other Systems are not insular, they are composed of and interact with other

systemssystems Today's models typically represent one perspective of one system and Today's models typically represent one perspective of one system and

are difficult to combine with other perspectives so the whole system of are difficult to combine with other perspectives so the whole system of systems can be understoodsystems can be understood

These different perspectives come from different stakeholders using These different perspectives come from different stakeholders using different tools and different languages – but they all talk about the same different tools and different languages – but they all talk about the same systems and express overlapping informationsystems and express overlapping information

Our objective is to enable model and language integration and Our objective is to enable model and language integration and expression using multiple viewpointsexpression using multiple viewpoints

This must be done in an open environment that can leverage a broad This must be done in an open environment that can leverage a broad communitycommunity

Where We Are TodayWhere We Are Today

MOF (Meta Object Facility)MOF (Meta Object Facility) Modeling languages in OMG are defined in the MOF, Modeling languages in OMG are defined in the MOF,

this provides a model driven platform for defining this provides a model driven platform for defining the structure of modeling languages and the structure of modeling languages and interchanging models in those languagesinterchanging models in those languages

Both new and existing languages have been defined Both new and existing languages have been defined in the MOF, including UML, DoDAF, XSD, SQL, Etc.in the MOF, including UML, DoDAF, XSD, SQL, Etc.

The exchange format is called “XMI”The exchange format is called “XMI” This allows models in multiple languages to co-exist This allows models in multiple languages to co-exist

in the same repository and be exchanged between in the same repository and be exchanged between toolstools

But: The Meta-MuddleBut: The Meta-Muddle

The MOF is structural and does not provide for multiple The MOF is structural and does not provide for multiple languages, profiles & viewpoints to be easily integrated.languages, profiles & viewpoints to be easily integrated.

OMG defines “languages” as both MOF and UML profiles, these OMG defines “languages” as both MOF and UML profiles, these don’t play well togetherdon’t play well together

The OMG and other organizations have created stovepipes, hard The OMG and other organizations have created stovepipes, hard to integrate and understandto integrate and understand

Since each stovepipe has to solve world hunger, each becomes Since each stovepipe has to solve world hunger, each becomes big and complex or diesbig and complex or dies

Consider using these together today:Consider using these together today: UML-2, BPMN-2, IMM, ODM, SBVR, SoaML, SysML, UPDMUML-2, BPMN-2, IMM, ODM, SBVR, SoaML, SysML, UPDM Profiles do not mix well with other profiles or with other meta models Profiles do not mix well with other profiles or with other meta models

at allat all Mapping the stovepipes does not make an effective integrated Mapping the stovepipes does not make an effective integrated

environment!environment! This meta-muddle is compromising the value of each standard This meta-muddle is compromising the value of each standard

and making OMG & modeling less relevantand making OMG & modeling less relevant We need to FIX the Meta-Muddle Madness!We need to FIX the Meta-Muddle Madness!

Related Current OMG Related Current OMG ProcessesProcesses

fUML (Completed) – Formal, Executable subset of fUML (Completed) – Formal, Executable subset of UMLUML

Semantic MOF (In finalization) – Adds a few of the Semantic MOF (In finalization) – Adds a few of the “semantic web” capabilites to MOF“semantic web” capabilites to MOF

Diagram Definition – Formal specification of the Diagram Definition – Formal specification of the relationship between models and views of that relationship between models and views of that modelmodel

MOF 2 RDF – Ability to represent MOF models in MOF 2 RDF – Ability to represent MOF models in the semantic webthe semantic web

“Fit for Purpose”Architecture Descriptions

Models

Based on models and authoritative information (data), the architectural description can support desired presentations for multiple purposes.

Example - DoDAF-2 VisionExample - DoDAF-2 Vision

The Architectural EcosystemThe Architectural EcosystemOpen Markets, Open WorldOpen Markets, Open World

The technologies and standards that have been The technologies and standards that have been successful are those that provide a foundation for successful are those that provide a foundation for the marketplace to build onthe marketplace to build on Visual Basic, Java, Eclipse, TCP/IP, EtcVisual Basic, Java, Eclipse, TCP/IP, Etc

Why are people still building their modeling Why are people still building their modeling foundations on PowerPoint, Visio and Excel?foundations on PowerPoint, Visio and Excel? Because the foundation we have provided is not open – it Because the foundation we have provided is not open – it

is a “closed world” except for the restrictive capabilities of is a “closed world” except for the restrictive capabilities of UML profiles. UML profiles.

An Open Market / Open World approach to An Open Market / Open World approach to modeling has an inherently unlimited market and modeling has an inherently unlimited market and the potential to excite and embrace new users and the potential to excite and embrace new users and new marketsnew markets

This is being done nowThis is being done now Current Integrated Modeling EffortsCurrent Integrated Modeling Efforts

DoDAF DM2DoDAF DM2 FEA/FSAMFEA/FSAM Proprietary tool modelsProprietary tool models BPBPDDM & IMMM & IMM Nasa NExIOMNasa NExIOM (Proposed) OMG Business Modeling Framework(Proposed) OMG Business Modeling Framework Unified Process Model (NIST)Unified Process Model (NIST) Model Driven Solutions “EKB”Model Driven Solutions “EKB” Others….Others….

A major problem and multiple non integrated solutions – sounds like standards time!

Where We AreWhere We Are AESIG is trying to solve a “big problem”, this is not an AESIG is trying to solve a “big problem”, this is not an

easy transition. We are potentially stepping on some big easy transition. We are potentially stepping on some big toes!toes!

The SIG has been active for less than one yearThe SIG has been active for less than one year There are some open questionsThere are some open questions

What is the best foundation for our needs? Is it an evolution of What is the best foundation for our needs? Is it an evolution of MOF, Semantic Web, Common Logic, UML, Other?MOF, Semantic Web, Common Logic, UML, Other?

Is the core problem model integration or modeling language Is the core problem model integration or modeling language integrationintegration

How “semantic” do we need to be, or is structure and mapping How “semantic” do we need to be, or is structure and mapping sufficient?sufficient?

Are the solutions to this ready for standards or are they research?Are the solutions to this ready for standards or are they research?

!!

Notional ArchitectureNotional Architecture

Modular & Layered Semantic Model

Viewpoint-ATerminology, Structure

& Notation

Projection

Grounding

Viewpoint-BTerminology, Structure

& Notation

Viewpoint-CTerminology, Structure

& Notation

Grounding

Grounding

Projection

Projection

Architectural Information Linking, Federation, Integration & Mapping

Mapping

Recent ProgressRecent Progress

Last OMG meeting a strawman RFP was Last OMG meeting a strawman RFP was consideredconsidered This RFP is very “open” and asks for solutions This RFP is very “open” and asks for solutions

to the high level problemto the high level problem It could be satisfies by multiple technology It could be satisfies by multiple technology

foundations (MOF, RDF, Common Logic, Etc)foundations (MOF, RDF, Common Logic, Etc) The consensus was that this was to open and The consensus was that this was to open and

we should try and make more choices and we should try and make more choices and approach the problem in more stepsapproach the problem in more steps

Current ActivityCurrent Activity

Potential roadmaps are being Potential roadmaps are being prepared and discussedprepared and discussed UML centricUML centric Semantic Web CentricSemantic Web Centric

Example Ecosystem Example Ecosystem FoundationFoundation

Enterprise Knowledge BaseEnterprise Knowledge Base Integrates architectures using semantic Integrates architectures using semantic

webweb Initial funding from GSAInitial funding from GSA Provides that this is doableProvides that this is doable Open source on www.modeldriven.orgOpen source on www.modeldriven.org Evolving slowly, not currently fundedEvolving slowly, not currently funded

Getting InvolvedGetting Involved

OMG Membership is advantages but not OMG Membership is advantages but not requiredrequired

Created wiki and mailing listCreated wiki and mailing list http://www.omgwiki.org/architecture-ecosystem

Contact Cory Casanave (cory-c at modeldriven Contact Cory Casanave (cory-c at modeldriven dot com) for mailing list accessdot com) for mailing list access

OMG MeetingsOMG Meetings Dec 6-10, Santa Clara CADec 6-10, Santa Clara CA March 21-25March 21-25thth, Washington DC, Washington DC

DRILLDOWN SLIDESDRILLDOWN SLIDES

Mission Statement Mission Statement IntroductionIntroduction

The mission of the Architecture Ecosystem SIG (AE SIG) is to work with OMG domain and platform task forces, other relevant OMG SIGs, external entities and related industry groups to facilitate the creation of a common architectural ecosystem. This ecosystem will support the creation, analysis, integration and exchange of information between modeling languages across different domains, viewpoints and from differing authorities. In particular the need for business and enterprise level architectural viewpoints must be better integrated with the technical viewpoints that define systems to address enterprise needs. The AE SIG will focus on the capability to define and integrate languages and models in various viewpoints and support other groups that will focus on the specific viewpoints required for their specific domains. The set of viewpoints, supporting models and supporting technologies will comprise the ecosystem.

Problem StatementProblem Statement

OMG languages can be defined using the MOF meta model and models based on OMG standards can be exchanged and serialized using the MOF standards. In this way the MOF provides a common platform for exchanging and, in some cases managing, model information. Despite the MOF capabilities, languages and UML profiles are excessively stove piped and not easily integrated. Information in models is not easily accessible over the internet which makes it difficult to query, federate and links across models from different authorities and those in different languages. The semantics of language elements is not well grounded or formalized. Real and perceived issues with the MOF as well as OMG process have contributed to these problems.

Desired ResultDesired ResultThe resulting capability envisioned by the AE-SIG is that architectural viewpoints (also known as domain specific languages or DSLs) will be better integrated and consistent, enable more flexible extension and integration with other information, and therefore provide greater value. In addition these architectural viewpoints will be available as web-accessible data such that architectures can be used and federated across organizational and domain boundaries. This will enable architectures and architectural efforts to more directly address modern enterprise needs for data sharing, service use and reuse, business process integration, openness and collaboration on multiple levels.

The Model Integration The Model Integration ProblemProblem

The enterprise typically has many models for different parts of The enterprise typically has many models for different parts of the enterprise expressing different areas of concernthe enterprise expressing different areas of concern

While the concerns may be different, the concepts being While the concerns may be different, the concepts being modeled are cross-cuttingmodeled are cross-cutting

Stakeholders need to be able share model information with Stakeholders need to be able share model information with others, who may have different concerns and perspectives, to others, who may have different concerns and perspectives, to make better business and technical decisionsmake better business and technical decisions

We need to be able to connect and reason about independently We need to be able to connect and reason about independently conceived models so that elements and relations can cross conceived models so that elements and relations can cross those models regardless of source, perspective or languagethose models regardless of source, perspective or language

To do this we need to “connect the dots” between modelsTo do this we need to “connect the dots” between models Example: A process in BPMN may satisfy a requirement in BMMExample: A process in BPMN may satisfy a requirement in BMM

The Language Integration The Language Integration ProblemProblem

Languages are a means of expressing and communicating viewsLanguages are a means of expressing and communicating views Languages are inclusive of textual and diagrammatic representations Languages are inclusive of textual and diagrammatic representations

of informationof information Different languages express overlapping concepts and concerns in Different languages express overlapping concepts and concerns in

different ways that are difficult to connectdifferent ways that are difficult to connect By better understanding the common semantics of languages we can By better understanding the common semantics of languages we can

better understand the common elements of modelsbetter understand the common elements of models We need better capabilities to express the semantic relationships We need better capabilities to express the semantic relationships

between languages and the common semantics of languagesbetween languages and the common semantics of languages Information about a system should be able to be projected onto Information about a system should be able to be projected onto

multiple languages (textual or graphical), as is suited for a particular multiple languages (textual or graphical), as is suited for a particular purposepurpose

This will simplify our set of languages as well as support the definition This will simplify our set of languages as well as support the definition of whole systems perspectives that utilize multiple languagesof whole systems perspectives that utilize multiple languages

Example: A service defined in SoaML may be implemented by a BPMN Example: A service defined in SoaML may be implemented by a BPMN process and transfer data defined in OWL. These elements should be process and transfer data defined in OWL. These elements should be able to be able to be usedused as if they were defined in the “local” language as if they were defined in the “local” language

The Need for ViewpointsThe Need for Viewpoints

While we want to understand the whole system, we need to While we want to understand the whole system, we need to enable stakeholders to see it in their termsenable stakeholders to see it in their terms

Viewpoints provide a lens into the whole system tuned to the Viewpoints provide a lens into the whole system tuned to the needs of particular stakeholdersneeds of particular stakeholders

Viewpoints combine particular parts of the system model and Viewpoints combine particular parts of the system model and using particular languages to create views of the system suitable using particular languages to create views of the system suitable for a stakeholder for a stakeholder

Viewpoints may subset the information in the whole system, may Viewpoints may subset the information in the whole system, may specialize vocabulary and use specific notations and syntaxesspecialize vocabulary and use specific notations and syntaxes

Viewpoint separation: Separating different aspects of a systemViewpoint separation: Separating different aspects of a system Viewpoint integration: Integrating consistent aspects of a systemViewpoint integration: Integrating consistent aspects of a system Note: viewpoints and the need for them need to be clarified.Note: viewpoints and the need for them need to be clarified. Example: A security viewpoint deals with roles, processes, data Example: A security viewpoint deals with roles, processes, data

and rights using particular diagrams and tablesand rights using particular diagrams and tables

The Need for SemanticsThe Need for Semantics

In current meta-models semantics is mixed with syntax and In current meta-models semantics is mixed with syntax and often poorly defined, yet over specifiedoften poorly defined, yet over specified

The same and related concepts are re-invented without any The same and related concepts are re-invented without any connection between themconnection between them

Semantics grounds the languages in what they meanSemantics grounds the languages in what they mean We have a need for a better semantics foundation to represent We have a need for a better semantics foundation to represent

the concepts we are modeling (in use models and in languages)the concepts we are modeling (in use models and in languages) Semantic models need to be able to be layered and modular, Semantic models need to be able to be layered and modular,

not requiring a “universal model”not requiring a “universal model” While we want to enable a semantic foundation, not all While we want to enable a semantic foundation, not all

language concepts should have to be semantically groundedlanguage concepts should have to be semantically grounded Example: The concept of classification by types is almost Example: The concept of classification by types is almost

universal, yet UML classifier has no relation to the well defined universal, yet UML classifier has no relation to the well defined concept outside of UML that may be similar but differentconcept outside of UML that may be similar but different