Author Topic: about UML and MOF alignment  (Read 1111 times)


  • EA User
  • **
  • Posts: 216
  • Karma: +1/-0
  • The Truth Is Out There
    • View Profile
about UML and MOF alignment
« on: January 30, 2006, 03:55:10 pm »
while reading MOF, arised question about UML and MOF aligment.

It's said, that MOF defines UML. However, UML uperstructure notes, that it reuses UML Infrastructure packages as a basic ontology foundation. There is no MOF mentioned.
MOF also reuses (imports/merge) UML Infrastructure packages. To complicate things for me, there are EMOF (essential MOF) and CMOF (complete MOF) also... Human understandable difference isn't said in specification - sad.

Now about levels: on M4 - MOF, on M3 - UML, e.g. UML is instance of MOF, however
UML Superstructure (as I believe it's usable UML - as this part is commonly and widely used) reuses UML Infractructure as MOF do. I would say, that in M4 should be UML Infrastructure, in M3 - UML superstructure and MOF (EMOF?/CMOF?).

Could somebody clafiry this thing, as right now I'm lost a bit
registertm everything to SparX


  • EA Novice
  • *
  • Posts: 16
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: about UML and MOF alignment
« Reply #1 on: March 07, 2006, 03:53:55 pm »
Well, the key thing to understand is that these 4 levels are possible levels.  The concept of MOF/UML is that you can describe any level of meta model using your existing descriptions. Hence, UML Infrastructure can be used by MOF to setup a MetaModel. This metamodel can then serve any meaning you want. For UML, it serves as the MetaModel for UML Superstructure, and it also does that for CWM.
See MOF 2.0 Spec Chapter 7, Fig. 7.1 for some details.

The separation between EMOF and CMOF has basically been done to provide a "simple" and a complex MOF.