UML/DSL por Johan Den Haan (a propósito de Steven Kelly)

Continuando la rueda de discusiones, Johan Den Haan se apoya en la nota que publicara hace pocos días Steven Kelly, a propósito de las afirmaciones originadas en Microsoft, revalorizando el lugar de UML, o reubicando a las herramientas DSL. Johan comparte en cierta medida las observaciones de Kelly, pero, como antes lo hiciera ya en otros artículos, da un paso más, proponiendo un modelo más amplio para solucionar el problema en discusión:

I definitely agree with Steven [...] that using UML and DSLs as presented by Cameron isn't a very good idea. I do however think, that the worlds of MDE (MDE is broader in scope than MDA, it adds multiple modeling dimensions and a software engineering process) and DSLs aren't opposites. I think that both DSLs and MDE are necessary assets for Model-Driven approaches. While multiple DSLs are needed to describe a software artifact (see for example the different architectural aspects of Service-Oriented Business Applications (SOBA) ), MDE is needed to provide a framework for connecting the different DSLs. An MDE methodology defines a framework of dimensions and their intersections, thereby defining the different models needed to describe a certain software application. This information also gives us the opportunity to discuss the needed DSL's in a (more or less) formal way. Last but not least, an MDE methodology also describes a software engineering process and a maintenance process, thereby defining the order in which models should be produced, how they are transformed into each other (if applicable) and how to change an existing software system using models.

Es recomendable, saludable, recorrer todo el material de Johan.
Más adelante, otros enfoques...

Steven Kelly sobre Microsoft, UML, DSL

Sin mucho tiempo en vacaciones + Beta Test de Plex 6.1, veo una contestación de Steven Kelly al giro de Microsoft hacia UML + DSL. Steven no comparte el cambio, pero creo que explica bien su naturaleza:

Now things start to become a little clearer! The UML models are being used like MDA's PIMs, and the DSL models are the PSMs. The DSLs are thus not specific to the problem domain, as they should be, but to the solution domain: they have the implementation concepts of a particular Microsoft framework or library. (I've blogged earlier about the problems of such framework-based DSLs.) Putting UML before DSLs in this way isn't just putting the cart before the horse: it's putting the horse firmly into the cart -- and pulling it yourself.

What makes this all the more ironic is how eager Microsoft were to put the boot into UML and MDA back at the start of the DSL Tools project.

Lo de "explicar bien su naturaleza" no incluye su imágen de "poner el caballo adentro del carro"...
Steven retrotrae el debate a sus orígenes:

If you want to look back at calm, polite, reasoned discussions, try Microsoft's Alan Cameron Wills' and IBM's Simon Johnston's blog posts. If you want to see the big guns fighting it out with good old FUD-slinging, try Steve Cook vs. Grady Booch (Dec 3, 2004).

Volveremos sobre esto (vacaciones mediante)...