Implementation of the modeling language also
revealedmissing information fromthe domainmodel, such aswhich properties need
to have values, which are legal data types, and which parameters (inherited from
MOF) must be de?¬?ned as returns. All the additional constraints were added to the
metamodel and the original domain model was not updated. The metamodel of the
modeling language became more detailed and precise. It could also be tested as a
language once instantiated, unlike the documentation of the domain model. Testing
of the language de?¬?nition was done by modeling the reference applications and
generating their implementation code.
Model Hierarchy To model large or complex insurance products, the modeling
language was extended to support model hierarchies. This was done by using a
package concept: each package could be described in detail with a submodel. The
submodel was based on the same modeling language, so all the modeling concepts
available in the higher level model could be used in the submodel. In the metamodel,
an optional decomposition link was de?¬?ned from each Package object type to the
product modeling language (see Fig. 6.6). In addition, package structures could be
speci?¬?ed in one diagram using a Consist of relationship, and the language also had
support for specifying dependencies among packages.
Pages:
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257