© 2005-2006 the athena consortium. 6-2. model-driven development with pim4soa,

© 2005-2006 The ATHENA Consortium.

6-2. Model-Driven Development with

PIM4SOA

<Presenter>

<Company>, <Country>

<E-mail>

2© 2005-2006 The ATHENA Consortium.

Outline

• PIM4SOA• Rapid prototyping with PIM4SOA• Case study: AIDIMA e-procurement scenario• References


PIM4SOA


The problem

• Currently, enterprises face many difficulties related to lack of

interoperability.

• ATHENA Overall objective: Contribution to enabling enterprises to

seamlessly interoperate with others

• Seamlessly involves reducing as much as possible the effort required to

translate the interoperability rules specified by the business expert to suitable

technical platform (SOA).

• PROBLEMS:

– Several ways to specify interoperability at business level

– Several kinds of SOA platforms

– Too big gap


Alternatives 1: Too big gap

Business expert

IT infrastructure

GAP

Aris Grai Metis Moogo

GRIDP2PBDI Teams

WSA

POP* CIM

PSM


Alternatives 2: Too big gap

Business expert

IT infrastructure

GAP

Aris Grai Metis Moogo

GRIDP2PBDI Teams

WSA

POP* CIM

PIM

PSM

PIM4SOA


The challenge

Business expert

IT infrastructure

GAP

CIM

PIM

PSM

• The goal of creating the PIM4SOA metamodel was to define a language that could be used to describe SOAs at a platform independent level.– Which are the collaborations that need to

be implemented to perform the interoperability objectives stated at the business level?

– What is the sequence of messages exchanged to perform the collaboration?

– Which is the information exchanged?– Which are the non-functional

requirements that the interaction has to meet?

– ….• The resulting PIM4SOA should be

able to support a formal transition between enterprise models and IT implementations


PIM4SOA objectives

• Platform independent model for specifying service-oriented architectures– Represent SOA solutions in a platform independent

way– Integrate and define mappings to Web services,

agents, peer-to-peer (P2P) and Grid execution platforms.

– Bridging the gap between the enterprise layer and the technical layer

– Establishing relationships between layers through model-based transformations

– Two-way transformations supporting both• model-driven development (MDD); and• architecture-driven modernisation (ADM)


PIM4SOA requirements

Depending on the source of requirements• From the enterprise or business viewpoint

– Process, Organisation, Product and System (POPS) dimensions

– Mapping enterprise and business model elements to PIM4SOA

• From the platform point of view– What are the necessary PSM elements to be

represented at PIM level?– How do we identify these elements?– We need identify overlapping elements amongst

platforms


Characteristics for metamodel

• Suited for target roles– Support domain concepts and scenarios of target roles– Ease-of-use and understandable for business modeller (use terms)– Support precise details and correctness for solution architect

• Avoid unnecessary complexity– Keep it simple stupid (KISS)– Number of elements and associations– Type and navigation of associations

• Make it modular– Provide core with extensions– Define and illustrate possible subsets (”dialects”) that support scenarios– Consider integration and extension points

• Suited for implementation– EMF representation– Transformation from/to UML profile– Transformation to PSM


Metamodel for (software) services Metamodel for (automated software) processes

Metamodel for information Metamodel for quality of service (QoS)

PIM4SOA addresses four system aspects

Services are an abstraction and an encapsulation of the functionality provided by an autonomous entity. Service architectures are composed of functions provided by a system or a set of systems to achieve a shared goal.

Web Services Architecture as proposed by W3C (W3C 2004)UML Profile for Enterprise Distributed Object Computing (OMG 2002)

Information is related to the messages or structures exchanged, processed and stored by software systems or software components.

Structural constructs for class modelling in UML 2.0 (OMG 2003)UML Profile for Enterprise Distributed Object Computing (OMG 2002)

Processes describe sequencing of work in terms of actions, control flows, information flows, interactions, protocols, etc.

Business Process Definition Metamodel (BPDM) (IBM et al. 2004)UML Profile for Enterprise Distributed Object Computing (OMG 2002)

Extra-functional qualities that can be applied to services, information and processes.

UML Profile for Modeling Quality of Service and Fault Tolerance Characteristics and Mechanisms (OMG 2004)


Service metamodel

Collaboration– Collaboration represents a pattern of interaction

between participating roles

– A binary collaboration specifies a service

CollaborationUse– The model element to represent a usage of a

service

Role– The model element to represent a usage of a

service

RoleBinding– Relates a role with a usage of a service.

RoleType– In a service oriented domain two are the

RoleTypes identified: the requester and the provider

Behaviour– An abstract class for the specification of

messages sequence within a service

ServiceProvider– Specify an entity describing and specifying in its

turn services, roles and constraints

ProviderType– The ServiceProviers can have to types: Abstract

ore Executable

EndPoint– Represents an address identifying a service

Registry– A Registry model element is based on index

approach containing addressable services

RegistryItem– Represents a service and an end point.


Information metamodel

Item– Defines the set of elements that a role

manages.

ItemType– Represents simple types: string, integer and

boolean.

Role– is imported from the service metamodel.

PackageableElement– Extracted from the UML2.0 specification.

Association– Represents the association between two

entities.

– It is used to describe complex types

Package– Extracted from the UML2.0 specification.

Document– Represents an object with a specific structure

and composed by entities.

TypeLibrary– defines a packaging structure containing some

types of the application

BusinessTypeLibraryEntity– represents a structure element of information

AttributeNameElement– extracted from the UML2.0 specification.

Element– extracted from the UML2.0 specification.


Process metamodel

Process elements

Process aspect

Scope– Scope is an abstract container for individual

behavioral steps

Step– Step is a single node in a process, such as

making a decision or calling an external service. The ‘everyday’ specialization of Step is Task

Process– Implements a behaviour for a service provider,

as a set of tasks and decisions (Steps) linked by control flows (Flows), optionally including detail on the exchanged messages / items.

StructuredTask– A composite task consisting of a collection of

Steps related to a specific subsection of a Process

Task– The low level ‘building blocks’ of a process

• calls to another service • require manual intervention

Task– Defines an interface for input or output flows on

a Step

Pin– Input or output for a specific item type when a

flow connects to a Step in the Process

Flow– Provide the links between Steps (tasks etc.) in

the behavior. A flow may be associated with a message type being transported.

ItemFlow– A flow between specific pins on interactions to

show precise relationships between output from one Step/Interaction and input on another

JoinSpecification– Defines convergence behaviour when two flows

provide input to a single Step/Interaction

GuardSpecification– Defines conditions (e.g. in terms of Pin

contents) under which an output flow is or is not activated


Non-functional metamodel

NFA– Represents Non-Functional Aspects for a

specific usage of a service. • defined in Collaboration and ServiceProvider

specification• related with CollaborationUse element

All Others– Defined in the OMG standard for specifying

quality of service


Rapid prototyping with PIM4SOA


Rapid prototyping framework for SOA

PIM4SOA

MDD FrameworkWSDL Documents BDI Teams

WSDL Analyzer

External WSDL Documents

Lyndon

Johnson Jack

«invoke» «invoke»

• Johnson and Lyndon provide enactment of all the roles found in an SOA (consumer, provider, intermediary) and flexible communication between Web services through an intuitive user interface• The WSDL Analyzer tool detected syntactical mismatches between service descriptions and provides a basis for runtime mediation of Web service messages

• The Web service extensions to the JACK autonomous agents platform allow SOAs to use agents for brokering, mediation and negotiation between Web services• BDI teams provide a flexible and composable alternative to traditional approaches to Web service composition

• The ATHENA baseline methodology for SOA provides guidelines for developing platform independent models for SOA (PIM4SOA).• Provides a set of modelling tools and services for mapping between PIM4SOA and platform specific models (Web services and BDI agents)

AgentsServices

Modelling

SemanticSpace

Service-OrientedArchitecture Model

Web ServiceExecution Artefacts

AgentExecution Artefacts

BPELExecution Artefacts

P2PExecution Artefacts

Web ServiceSpecification Model

Agent SpecificationModel

BPEL SpecificationModel

P2P SpecificationModel

Model Transformation

UML Profile for Web Services

UML Profile for Agents

UML Profile for BPEL

UML Profile for P2P

Model Transformation

Architecture Specification

ATHENA IntegratedExecution Infrastructure

RegistryRepository

Service Wrappers (Enterprise A)

Evaluation & Negotiation of Available Functionality

Enhanced Service Interconnection Bus

Cross-org.

Intra-org.

Existing Enterprise Applications

PublicInfrastructure Services

Service Wrappers(Enterprise X)

Service Wrappers(Enterprise Y)

InternalInfrastructure Services

Process Execution Platform(BPEL)

Goal-orientedAdaptive ExecutionPlatform(Agents)

Goal-orientedAdaptive ExecutionPlatform(Agents)

ActiveModel Platform(AKMii)

ActiveModel Platform(AKMii)

Legend

Message-OrientedPlatform(MQSeries)

Message-OrientedPlatform(MQSeries)

Server-side Component Platform(.NET, J2EE)

Server-side Component Platform(.NET, J2EE)

ComposedWebServicePlatform(WebServices)

Business Process/Agent

Active (Business) Model

Web/Server Component

Middleware Process/Agent

Middleware Component

Adaptive Distributed Resource Mgt Platform (P2P)

Deployment

UML Profile for SOA• Information• Service• Process• QoSR

efer

ence

On

tolo

gy

annotated with

Model to Model Transformation

Model to TextTransformation

OWLOntology

annotatedwith

annotatedwith

EnterpriseModel

UML Profile for POP*• Process• Organisation• Product• …

Model to ModelTransformation

Business Requirements

Analysis

annotated with

ATHENA baseline methodology for SOA (overview)

Method chunks for SOA andWeb Service Interoperability

ReferenceOntology

annotatedwith

WSDLDocument

OWL-SDocument

BPELDocument

BDIPlan

XSDDocument

WS-?Document

ATHENA Web ServiceExecutionInfrastructure

Model Registry (A6)

Oth

er C

om

pan

y

Internal Service Interconnection Bus

Wrappers

Leg

acy A

pp

licatio

ns

Execution

Serv

ice

Serv

ice

Composition

Neh

em

iah

(A

2)

JA

CK

Mediation

AR

ES

(A

3)

Evaluation

ServiceModels

PlatformModels

ContractModels

Compo-sition

Models

Neg

otiatio

n

ExternalRegistry

Pu

blish

in

gIn

teractio

n

...

Brokering

Bro

kerin

g T

oo

l (A

5)

OWLOntology

annotatedwith

UML Profile for POP*• Process• Organisation• Product• …

En

terp

rise

Mo

del

ProcessView

OrganisationView

ProductView

…View

1

1


Business Requirements

Analysis

SO

AM

od

elInformation

ViewService

ViewProcess

ViewQoSView

UML Profile for SOA• Information• Service• Process• QoS

annotatedwith

XMLMessage

ServiceDescription

ProcessExecution

QoSDescriptionW

eb S

ervi

ce M

od

el

UML Profile for Web Services• XML Message (XSD)• Service Description (WSDL)• Process Execution (BPEL)• QoS


1

1..*

Model to TextTransformation

Web

Ser

vice

Do

cum

ents

1..*

1..*

ATHENA baselinemethodology for SOA (detailed)


MDI modelling environment

ATHENA ExecutionInfrastructure

ModelRepository

ModelTransformation

(ATL, MTF)

Execution Platform andInfrastructure Services(WS, Agents, BRMF, …)

Eclipse/RSM Platform

CollaborativeEnterpriseModelling

Cross-Organisational

BusinessProcess

Modelling

ServiceIntegration

andComposition

Modelling

InformationMapping

Modelling

PlatformIntegrationModelling


PIM for SOA

Information Service Process QoS

CBP

XSD WSDL BPEL WS-?BRMF Jack

ARIS POP*

UML Profile for SOA

UML*

Maestro

Model 2 Model

Model 2 Text

Import / ExportModel 2 Model

Export + XML 2 Model

CBP: Collaborative Business ProcessPIM: Platform Independent ModelSOA: Service-Oriented ArchitectureXSD: XML Schema Definition

BRMF: Business Resource Management FrameworkWSDL: Web Service Description LanguageBPEL: Business Process Execution Language

Tools and services (overview)


RSM and UML profile for PIM4SOA


Case study: AIDIMA e-procurement scenario


Introduction to business scenario

• Scenario is based on the current situation of the furniture SMEs regarding the procurement issues

• Value in the furniture industry is concentrated in design, manufacturing, sales and marketing– Clear benefit from the adoption of e-commerce initiatives

• Initiatives in the field of e-procurement of raw and semi-finished materials in the coming years– Significant benefits to be achieved in terms of cost reduction and

efficiency • Distribution in the furniture industry is structured in a

complex way– Extranets and Internet-enabled supply-chain automation should

optimize the relationships• Order management and logistics with e-commerce

implementations– Beneficial to the furniture industry

R3.

Ord

er

R1. Request for QuotationR2. Quotation

R4.

Ord

er

Con

firm

atio

n

Interior Decoration

Project

M2. Quotation

M1. Request for Quotation

M3.

Ord

er

M4.

Ord

er

Con

firm

atio

n

MANUFACTURER

RETAILERPROVIDER

● Retailer-Manufacturer● 1. RFQ● 2. Quote● 3. Order

● Manufacturer-Supplier● 1. RFQ● 2. Quote● 3. Order● 4. Order Confirmation

● Retailer-Manufacturer● 4. Order Confirmation


Selling process: Customer-oriented scenario

Delivery

R5. Delivery NoteR6. Packing List R7. Invoice

Customer communication

R3.

O

rder

R1. Request for Quotation

R2. QuotationR

4. O

rder

C

onfi

rmat

ion Interior Decoration Project

Looks for furniture

Invoice

Delivery

MANUFACTURER

RETAILER


Procurement process: Supplier-oriented scenario

M2. Quotation

M6. Invoice

M1. Request for Quotation

M3.

Ord

er

M4.

Ord

er C

onfi

rmat

ion

MANUFACTURER

PROVIDER

M5. Delivery Note

Delivery


5 main problems

1. Repetitive manual process for regular bulk orders– Much of the manufactured products are generic and this involves

repeated periodic processing of similar or identical orders

2. Confusion resulting from poor product descriptions– Clients very often order the wrong products!

3. Missing information (both from supplier and buyer!)– Permasa have 3 people employed on the client site and 1 person

employed on the supplier side to ensure the integrity of orders and RFQs

4. Lag time from product order to delivery could be shorter.– Shortening time from ordering to receiving raw materials from the

supplier has a direct effect on the delivery date of the finished product

5. Time spent rating supplier– Permasa conducts tri-monthly reviews of their suppliers to ensure that

standards are kept


5 main expectations

1. Major reduction in false/incorrect orders

2. Dramatic shortening of time from order to delivery

3. Dramatic reduction in surplus stock in warehouse

4. Ability to search new providers and apply Permasa criteria to rate those providers

5. Better integration between internal systems. (i.e. Stock, purchasing, manufacturing, invoicing sub-systems)


Possible solution

Database (OS400)

Sales Mgmt. (ILE)

Manufacturing (ILE)

Purchasing (ILE)

Web Services Layer

Customer Order processing Procurement

Logistics(ILE)

Client Supplier

Design(AutoCAD)

Integration Layer


Data exchange in e-procurement

RetailerFrontEndSystem

(OMS – Order Management System)

ManufacturerFrontEndSystem

(ERP – Enterprise Resource Planning)

Send RFQ

Respond RFQQuotation

Approve QuotationSend Order

Confirm Order

Change Order

Send Goods & Delivery Note

Return Delivery Note signed

Send Invoice

Confirm Order Changed


Enterprise model: e-procurement process


PIM4SOA: Order process


PIM4SOA: Services interfaces


PIM4SOA: Delivery and invoicing collaborations


PIM4SOA: Obtain quotation collaboration


PIM4SOA: Furniture procurement collaboration

• Three roles – “Retailer”,– ”Manufacturer”– “Supplier”

• Two usage of collaboration – “Goods Supply”– “Materials Supply”

• Relationshipsbetween role and collaboration use

– “RoleBinding”


PIM4SOA: Goods supply collaboration


PIM4SOA: Documents and type libraries

Documents andtype libraries

Type library


Model of anorder document

PIM4SOA: Order document


Conclusions

• The PIM4SOA metamodel is a valid tool to decouple the logical solution from its technical implementation.

• It allows us to derive architectures that later could be implemented in heterogeneous environments.

• The PIM4SOA could be also used as an intermediate step when we plan to obtain platform assets from an enterprise model.

Business expert

IT infrastructure

GAP

CIM

PIM

PSM


References


References (ATHENA deliverables)

[ATHENA] ATHENA, "ATHENA Public Web Site", ATHENA Integrated Project (IST-507849). http://www.athena-ip.org/

[ATHENA A5 2005] ATHENA A5, "D.A5.1: Perspectives on Service-Oriented Architectures and there application in environments that require solutions to be planned and customisable", ATHENA IP, Deliverable D.A5.1, 2005.

[ATHENA A5 2005] ATHENA A5, "D.A5.2: Model and Specification of Service Descriptions and Usage as well as Advanced Concepts", ATHENA IP, Deliverable D.A5.2, 2005.

[ATHENA A5 2006] ATHENA A5, "D.A5.3: Architecture of SOA Platforms", ATHENA IP, Deliverable D.A5.3, 2006.

[ATHENA A5 2006] ATHENA A5, "D.A5.4: Execution Framework(s) for Planned and Customisable Service-Oriented Architectures", ATHENA IP, Deliverable D.A5.4, 2006.

[ATHENA A5 2006] ATHENA A5, "D.A5.5: Validation of Research Results", ATHENA IP, Deliverable D.A5.5, 2006.

[ATHENA A6 2005] ATHENA A6, "D.A6.1: Specification of a Basic Architecture Reference Model", ATHENA IP, Deliverable D.A6.1, 2005.

[ATHENA A6 2006] ATHENA A6, "D.A6.2: Enhanced Registry/Repository Infrastructure", ATHENA IP, Deliverable D.A6.2, 2006.

[ATHENA A6 2006] ATHENA A6, "D.A6.3: Model-driven and Adaptable Interoperability Framework", ATHENA IP, Deliverable D.A6.3, 2006.

[ATHENA A6 2006] ATHENA A6, "D.A6.4: Model-driven and Adaptable Interoperability Infrastructure", ATHENA IP, Deliverable D.A6.4, 2006.


References (Papers)

[Benguria, et al. 2006] G. Benguria, X. Larrucea, B. Elvesæter, T. Neple, A. Beardsmore, and M. Friess, ”A Platform Independent Model for Service Oriented Architectures”, to be presented at the 2nd International Conference on Interoperability of Enterprise Software and Applications (I-ESA 2006), Bordeaux, France, 2006.

[Elvesæter, et al. 2005] B. Elvesæter, A. Hahn, A.-J. Berre, and T. Neple, "Towards an Interoperability Framework for Model-Driven Development of Software Systems", in Proc. of the 1st International Conference on Interoperability of Enterprise Software and Applications (INTEROP-ESA 2005), Geneva, Switzerland, 2005.

[Elvesæter, et al. 2005] B. Elvesæter, R. K. Rolfsen, F. Lillehagen, and D. Karlsen, "Integrated Enterprise Service Architecture", in Proc. of the 12th ISPE International Conference on Concurrent Engineering (CE 2005), Fort Worth, Texas, USA, 2005, M. Sobolewski and P. Ghodous (Eds.), International Society for Productivity Enhancement, Inc., NY, USA, pp. 129-134.

[Lillehagen, et al. 2005] F. Lillehagen, D. Karlsen, H. G. Solheim, H. D. Jørgensen, H. Smith-Meyer, B. Elvesæter, and R. K. Rolfsen, "Enterprise Architecture - from Blueprints to Design Services", in Proc. of the 12th ISPE International Conference on Concurrent Engineering (CE 2005), Fort Worth, Texas, USA, 2005, M. Sobolewski and P. Ghodous (Eds.), International Society for Productivity Enhancement, Inc., NY, USA, pp. 121-128.

[Fischer, et al. 2006] K. Fischer, B. Elvesæter, A.-J. Berre, C. Hahn, C. Madrigal-Mora, and I. Zinnikus, ”Model-Driven Design of Interoperable Agents”, to be presented at the 2nd Workshop on Web Services Interoperability (WSI 2006), Bordeaux, France, 2006.

[Vayssière, et al. 2006] J. Vayssière, G. Benguria, B. Elvesæter, K. Fischer, and I. Zinnikus, "Rapid Prototyping for Service-Oriented Architectures", to be presented at the 2nd Workshop on Web Services Interoperability (WSI 2006), Bordeaux, France, 2006.


This course has been developed under the funding of the EC with the support of the EC ATHENA-IP Project.

Disclaimer and Copyright Notice: Permission is granted without fee for personal or educational (non-profit) use, previous notification is needed. For notification purposes, please, address to the ATHENA Training Programme Chair at [email protected]. In other cases please, contact at the same e-mail address for use conditions. Some of the figures presented in this course are freely inspired by others reported in referenced works/sources. For such figures copyright and all rights therein are maintained by the original authors or by other copyright holders. It is understood that all persons copying these figures will adhere to the terms and constraints invoked by each copyright holder.