In model-driven development (MDD), domain-specific modeling languages (DSMLs) act as a communication vehicle for aligning the requirements of domain experts with the needs of software engineers. With the rise of the UML as a de facto standard, UML/MOF-based DSMLs are now widely used for MDD. This paper documents design decisions collected from 90 UML/MOF-based DSML projects. These recurring design decisions were gained, on the one hand, by performing a systematic literature review (SLR) on the development of UML/MOF-based DSMLs. Via the SLR, we retrieved 80 related DSML projects for review. On the other hand, we collected decisions from developing ten DSML projects by ourselves. The design decisions are presented in the form of reusable decision records, with each decision record corresponding to a decision point in DSML development processes. Furthermore, we also report on frequently observed (combinations of) decision options as well as on associations between options which may occur within a single decision point or between two decision points. This collection of decision-record documents targets decision makers in DSML development (e.g., DSML engineers, software architects, domain experts). (authors' abstract) / Series: Technical Reports / Institute for Information Systems and New Media

In model-driven development (MDD), domain-specific modeling languages (DSMLs) act as a communication vehicle for aligning the requirements of domain experts with the needs of software engineers. With the rise of the UML as a de facto standard, UML/MOF-based DSMLs are now widely used for MDD. This paper documents design decisions collected from 90 UML/MOF-based DSML projects. These recurring design decisions were gained, on the one hand, by performing a systematic literature review (SLR) on the development of UML/MOF-based DSMLs. Via the SLR, we retrieved 80 related DSML projects for review. On the other hand, we collected decisions from developing ten DSML projects by ourselves. The design decisions are presented in the form of reusable decision records, with each decision record corresponding to a decision point in DSML development processes. Furthermore, we also report on frequently observed (combinations of) decision options as well as on associations between options which may occur within a single decision point or between two decision points. This collection of decision-record documents targets decision makers in DSML development (e.g., DSML engineers, software architects, domain experts). / Series: Technical Reports / Institute for Information Systems and New Media

In model-driven development (MDD), domain-specific modeling languages (DSMLs) act as a communication vehicle for aligning the requirements of domain experts with the needs of software engineers. With the rise of the UML as a de facto standard, UML/MOF-based DSMLs are now widely used for MDD. This paper documents design decisions collected from 90 UML/MOF-based DSML projects. These recurring design decisions were gained, on the one hand, by performing a systematic literature review (SLR) on the development of UML/MOF-based DSMLs. Via the SLR, we retrieved 80 related DSML projects for review. On the other hand, we collected decisions from developing ten DSML projects by ourselves. The design decisions are presented in the form of reusable decision records, with each decision record corresponding to a decision point in DSML development processes. Furthermore, we also report on frequently observed (combinations of) decision options as well as on associations between options which may occur within a single decision point or between two decision points. This collection of decision-record documents targets decision makers in DSML development (e.g., DSML engineers, software architects, domain experts). (authors' abstract) / Series: Technical Reports / Institute for Information Systems and New Media

In the process of model-driven development (MDD) of software artifacts, domain-specific modeling languages (DSMLs) are an integral part. They act as the communication vehicle for aligning the requirements of the domain expert with the needs of the software engineer. With the rise of the UML as de facto standard for modeling software systems, MOF/UML-based DSMLs are now widely used for MDD. This paper documents design decisions from ten DSML projects which are based on the MOF/UML and which we conducted over the last years. We present our experiences in the form of reusable decision templates for all decision points detected in each phase of the DSML development process. Furthermore, we report also on identified decision dependencies which may occur within a single decision or between two decisions. (author's abstract) / Series: Technical Reports / Institute for Information Systems and New Media

The benefits of Model-Driven Software Development (MDSD) and Domain-Specific Languages (DSLs) wrt. efficiency and quality in software engineering increase the demand for custom languages and the need for efficient methods for language engineering. This motivated the introduction of language families that aim at further reducing the development costs and the maintenance effort for custom languages. The basic idea is to exploit the commonalities and provide means to enable systematic variation among a set of related languages. Current techniques and methodologies for language engineering are not prepared to deal with the particular challenges of language families. First, language engineering processes lack means for a systematic analysis, specification and management of variability as found in language families. Second, technical approaches for a modular specification and realisation of languages suffer from insufficient modularity properties. They lack means for information hiding, for explicit module interfaces, for loose coupling, and for flexible module integration. Our first contribution, Feature-Oriented Language Family Engineering (LFE), adapts methods from Software Product Line Engineering to the domain of language engineering. It extends Feature-Oriented Software Development to support metamodelling approaches used for language engineering and replaces state-of-the-art processes by a variability- and reuse-oriented LFE process. Feature-oriented techniques are used as means for systematic variability analysis, variability management, language variant specification, and the automatic derivation of custom language variants. Our second contribution, Integrative Role-Based Language Composition, extends existing metamodelling approaches with roles. Role models introduce enhanced modularity for object-oriented specifications like abstract syntax metamodels. We introduce a role-based language for the specification of language components, a role-based composition language, and an extensible composition system to evaluate role-based language composition programs. The composition system introduces integrative, grey-box composition techniques for language syntax and semantics that realise the statics and dynamics of role composition, respectively. To evaluate the introduced approaches and to show their applicability, we apply them in three major case studies. First, we use feature-oriented LFE to implement a language family for the ontology language OWL. Second, we employ role-based language composition to realise a component-based version of the language OCL. Third, we apply both approaches in combination for the development of SumUp, a family of languages for mathematical equations.

The benefits of Model-Driven Software Development (MDSD) and Domain-Specific Languages (DSLs) wrt. efficiency and quality in software engineering increase the demand for custom languages and the need for efficient methods for language engineering. This motivated the introduction of language families that aim at further reducing the development costs and the maintenance effort for custom languages. The basic idea is to exploit the commonalities and provide means to enable systematic variation among a set of related languages. Current techniques and methodologies for language engineering are not prepared to deal with the particular challenges of language families. First, language engineering processes lack means for a systematic analysis, specification and management of variability as found in language families. Second, technical approaches for a modular specification and realisation of languages suffer from insufficient modularity properties. They lack means for information hiding, for explicit module interfaces, for loose coupling, and for flexible module integration. Our first contribution, Feature-Oriented Language Family Engineering (LFE), adapts methods from Software Product Line Engineering to the domain of language engineering. It extends Feature-Oriented Software Development to support metamodelling approaches used for language engineering and replaces state-of-the-art processes by a variability- and reuse-oriented LFE process. Feature-oriented techniques are used as means for systematic variability analysis, variability management, language variant specification, and the automatic derivation of custom language variants. Our second contribution, Integrative Role-Based Language Composition, extends existing metamodelling approaches with roles. Role models introduce enhanced modularity for object-oriented specifications like abstract syntax metamodels. We introduce a role-based language for the specification of language components, a role-based composition language, and an extensible composition system to evaluate role-based language composition programs. The composition system introduces integrative, grey-box composition techniques for language syntax and semantics that realise the statics and dynamics of role composition, respectively. To evaluate the introduced approaches and to show their applicability, we apply them in three major case studies. First, we use feature-oriented LFE to implement a language family for the ontology language OWL. Second, we employ role-based language composition to realise a component-based version of the language OCL. Third, we apply both approaches in combination for the development of SumUp, a family of languages for mathematical equations.:1. Introduction 1.1. The Omnipresence of Language Families 1.2. Challenges for Language Family Engineering 1.3. Language Family Engineering with Features and Role-Based Composition 2. Review of Current Language Engineering 2.1. Language Engineering Processes 2.1.1. Analysis Phase 2.1.2. Design Phase 2.1.3. Implementation Phase 2.1.4. Applicability in Language Family Engineering 2.1.5. Requirements for an Enhanced LFE Process 2.2. Technical Approaches in Language Engineering 2.2.1. Specification of Abstract Syntax 2.2.2. Specification of Concrete Syntax 2.2.3. Specification of Semantics 2.2.4. Requirements for an Enhanced LFE Technique 3. Feature-Oriented Language Family Engineering 3.1. Foundations of Feature-Oriented SPLE 3.1.1. Introduction to SPLE 3.1.2. Feature-Oriented Software Development 3.2. Feature-Oriented Language Family Engineering 3.2.1. Variability and Variant Specification in LFE 3.2.2. Product-Line Realisation, Mapping and Variant Derivation for LFE 3.3. Case Study: Scalability in Ontology Specification, Evaluation and Application 3.3.1. Review of Evolution, Customisation and Combination in the OWL LanguageFamily 3.3.2. Application of Feature-Oriented Language Family Engineering for OWL 3.4. Discussion 3.4.1. Contributions 3.4.2. Related Work. 3.4.3. Conclusion 4. Integrative, Role-Based Composition for Language Family Engineering 4.1. Foundations of Role-Based Modelling. 4.1.1. Information Hiding and Interface Specification in Role Models 4.1.2. Loose Coupling and Flexible Integration in Role Composition 4.2. The LanGems Language Composition System 4.2.1. The Language Component Specification Language . 4.2.2. TheLanguageCompositionLanguage 4.2.3. TechniquesofLanguageComposition 4.3. Case Study: Component-based OCL 4.3.1. Role-Based OCL Modularisation 4.3.2. Role-Based OCL Composition 4.4. Discussion 4.4.1. Contributions 4.4.2. Related Work 4.4.3. Conclusion 5. LFE with Integrative, Role-Based Syntax and Semantics Composition 5.1. Integrating Features and Roles 5.2. SumUp Case Study 5.2.1. Motivation 5.2.2. Feature-Oriented Variability and Variant Specification 5.2.3. Role-Based Component Realisation 5.2.4. Feature-Oriented Variability and Variant Evolution 5.2.5. Model-driven Concrete Syntax Realisation 5.2.6. Model-driven Semantics Realisation 5.2.7. Role-Based Composition and Feature Mapping 5.2.8. Language Variant Derivation 5.3. Conclusion 6. Conclusion 6.1. Contributions 6.2. Outlook 6.2.1. Co-Evolution in Language Families 6.2.2. Role-Based Tool Integration. 6.2.3. Automatic Modularisation of Existing Language Families 6.2.4. Language Component Library Appendix A Appendix B Bibliography