Zoli,<br><br>Are these tools going to be included in an upcoming GME release? It sounds like they would be very useful, particularly in light of the fairly strong reverse engineering capabilities of EA.<br><br>-Joe<br><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 9:46 AM, Zoltan Molnar <<a href="mailto:zoltan.molnar@vanderbilt.edu">zoltan.molnar@vanderbilt.edu</a>> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Hi,<br>
What i can tell, is my little experience about interoperability:<br>
We have created a tool a while ago (kind of a standalone modelbuilder,<br>
operating on MgaProjects like an interpreter) for migrating Enterprise<br>
Arcihtect models (UML) into GME, the result was a MetaGME model, that is<br>
a metamodel.<br>
We we have seen that the models exported through 'Export to MOF/XMI'<br>
command from Enterprise Architect, left out completely the associations.<br>
(I can't recall which MOF/XMI version pair did support EA, but the<br>
bottom line is that it was not suitable.)<br>
<br>
So we had to use the 'Export to UML' feature, and after figuring out the<br>
logic of the exported file, our tool was able to build a MetaGME model,<br>
by supposing that each UML element in EA will be mapped into a <<Model>><br>
in the destination MetaGME model.<br>
Associations were preserved. So we can conclude, that we created basicly<br>
a tool which was able to map UML models automatically from a EA's XML<br>
custom format (just like our non-standard .XME file format) to GME's<br>
custom MetaGME model.<br>
<br>
[Note: This process gave born to another tool QuickReplace, an<br>
interpreter basicly, in MetaGME, which could change the selected<br>
object's stereotype instantly: for example from a <<Model>> to an<br>
<<Atom>>, while preserving certain (e.g. ReferTo, SetMember,<br>
ContainedBy) relationships.]<br>
<br>
br, Zoli<br>
<div><div></div><div class="Wj3C7c"><br>
<a href="mailto:jhoffert@dre.vanderbilt.edu">jhoffert@dre.vanderbilt.edu</a> wrote:<br>
> Hello, all.<br>
><br>
> One disadvantage I've heard for using GME is the lack of interoperability<br>
> with XMI-compliant tools. If this is the case is this simply because a GME<br>
> metamodel can not be expressed in Meta-Object Facility (MOF)? If so, why<br>
> can't it be? If not, why not?<br>
><br>
> Is the .xme format that GME uses not compatible with MOF?<br>
><br>
> Thanks.<br>
><br>
> -Joe<br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> gme-users mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:gme-users@list.isis.vanderbilt.edu">gme-users@list.isis.vanderbilt.edu</a><br>
> <a href="http://list.isis.vanderbilt.edu/mailman/listinfo/gme-users" target="_blank">http://list.isis.vanderbilt.edu/mailman/listinfo/gme-users</a><br>
><br>
><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
gme-users mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:gme-users@list.isis.vanderbilt.edu">gme-users@list.isis.vanderbilt.edu</a><br>
<a href="http://list.isis.vanderbilt.edu/mailman/listinfo/gme-users" target="_blank">http://list.isis.vanderbilt.edu/mailman/listinfo/gme-users</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>