skip to main content
10.1145/3330204.3330239acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagessbsiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

UMLCollab: A Hybrid Approach for Collaborative Modeling of UML Models

Published:20 May 2019Publication History

ABSTRACT

In collaborative software modeling the two main types of collaboration still present problems, such as the constant interruptions that hinder the cognitive process in synchronous collaboration, and the complicated and costly stages of conflict resolution in asynchronous collaboration. For this, this paper proposes a technique called "UMLCollab". This technique combines aspects from synchronous and asynchronous collaboration. Through experiments, developers applied the proposed solution and they achieved to an intermediate productivity in relation to traditional collaboration methods. The results showed that the "UMLCollab" improved the correctness of the changed models, the notion of developer regarding to the resolution of conflicts, and enabled the parallel changes occurring while other collaborators are working on without degrade the software diagrams being modelled locally.

References

  1. Kari Alho and Reijo Sulonen. 1998. Supporting virtual software projects on the Web. In Seventh IEEE International Workshop on Enabling Technologies: Infrastucture for Collaborative Enterprises (WET ICE'98). 10--14. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Kerstin Altmanninger, Martina Seidl, and Manuel Wimmer. 2009. A survey on model versioning approaches. International Journal of Web Information Systems 5, 3 (2009), 271--304.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. V Basili, G Caldiera, and DH Rombach. {n. d.}. The Goal Question Metric Paradigm: Encyclopedia of software engineering. 1994.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. M Brambilla, J Cabot, and M Wimmer. 2012. Model-driven software engineering in practice. Synthesis Lectures on (2012). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. P Brosch, M Seidl, K Wieland, M Wimmer, and P Langer. 2009. We can work it out: Collaborative conflict resolution in model versioning. ECSCW 2009 (2009).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Antonio Cicchetti, Henry Muccini, Patrizio Pelliccione, and Alfonso Pierantonio. 2009. Towards a framework for distributed and collaborative modeling. In 18th IEEE International Workshops on Enabling Technologies: Infrastructures for Collaborative Enterprises. IEEE, 149--154. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Catarina Costa and Leonardo Murta. 2013. Version Control in Distributed Software Development: A Systematic Mapping Study. Proceedings of IEEE 8th International Conference on Global Software Engineering - ICGSE'13 (2013), 90--99. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Hoa Khanh Dam and Aditya Ghose. 2011. An agent-based framework for distributed collaborative model evolution. (2011), 121.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. A. De Lucia, F. Fasano, G. Scanniello, and G. Tortora. 2007. Enhancing collaborative synchronous UML modelling with fine-grained versioning of software artefacts. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing 18, 5 (2007), 492--503. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Guilherme Ermel, Kleinner Farias, Lucian José Gonçales, and Vinicius Bischoff. 2018. Supporting the Composition of UML Component Diagrams. In Proceedings of the XIV Brazilian Symposium on Information Systems. ACM, 56. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Vinícius Soares Fonseca, Monalessa Perini Barcellos, and Ricardo de Almeida Falbo. 2016. Tools integration for supporting software measurement: a systematic literature review. iSys-Revista Brasileira de Sistemas de Informação 8, 4 (2016), 80--108.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. IBM. 2019. IBM Rational Software Architect Designer. https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/downloads/r/architect/index.html, acesso em 13 de Maio 2019.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Dimitrios S Kolovos, Louis M Rose, Nicholas Matragkas, Richard F Paige, Esther Guerra, Jesús Sánchez Cuadrado, Juan De Lara, István Ráth, Dániel Varró, Massimo Tisi, and Others. 2013. A research roadmap towards achieving scalability in model driven engineering. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Scalability in Model Driven Engineering. ACM, 2. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Stephan Krusche and Bernd Bruegge. 2014. Model-based real-time synchronization. In International Workshop on Comparison and Versioning of Software Models (CVSM14).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Dilshodbek Kuryazov and Andreas Winter. 2015. Collaborative Modeling Empowered By Modeling Deltas. In 3rd International Workshop on (Document) Changes: modeling, detection, storage and visualization - DChanges 2015 (DChanges 2015). 1--6. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Haidar Osman. 2013. Web-Based Collaborative Software Modeling. (2013).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Gregor Polančič and Gregor Jošt. 2016. The impact of the representatives of three types of process modeling tools on modeler's perceptions and performance. Journal of Software: Evolution and Process 28, 1 (2016), 27--56. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Javier Portillo-Rodríguez, Aurora Vizcaíno, Mario Piattini, and Sarah Beecham. 2012. Tools used in Global Software Engineering: A systematic mapping review. Information and Software Technology 54, 7 (2012), 663--685. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Anita Sarma and Andre Van Der Hoek. 2006. Towards awareness in the large. In IEEE International Conference on Global Software Engineering (ICGSE'06). IEEE, 127--131. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Boban Vesin, Rodi Jolak, and Michel R V Chaudron. 2017. OctoUML: an environment for exploratory and collaborative software design. In 39th International Conference on Software Engineering Companion (ICSE-C). IEEE Press, 7--10. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. J young Bang and D Popescu. 2012. Enabling Workspace Awareness for Collaborative Software Modeling. (2012).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Holt Zaugg, Richard E West, Isaku Tateishi, and Daniel L Randall. 2011. Mendeley: Creating communities of scholarly inquiry through research collaboration. TechTrends 55, 1 (2011), 32--36.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Nianping Zhu, John Grundy, John Hosking, Na Liu, Shuping Cao, and Akhil Mehra. 2007. Pounamu: A meta-tool for exploratory domain-specific visual language tool development. Journal of Systems and Software 80, 8 (2007), 1390--1407. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. UMLCollab: A Hybrid Approach for Collaborative Modeling of UML Models

          Recommendations

          Comments

          Login options

          Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

          Sign in
          • Published in

            cover image ACM Other conferences
            SBSI '19: Proceedings of the XV Brazilian Symposium on Information Systems
            May 2019
            623 pages
            ISBN:9781450372374
            DOI:10.1145/3330204

            Copyright © 2019 ACM

            Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

            Publisher

            Association for Computing Machinery

            New York, NY, United States

            Publication History

            • Published: 20 May 2019

            Permissions

            Request permissions about this article.

            Request Permissions

            Check for updates

            Qualifiers

            • research-article
            • Research
            • Refereed limited

            Acceptance Rates

            Overall Acceptance Rate181of557submissions,32%
          • Article Metrics

            • Downloads (Last 12 months)4
            • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

            Other Metrics

          PDF Format

          View or Download as a PDF file.

          PDF

          eReader

          View online with eReader.

          eReader