[Modeling] An Agent UML Profile
Dr. Hong Zhu
Tue, 24 Jun 2003 17:03:07 +0100
Thank you very much for clarifying the policy issues. I think it makes
----- Original Message -----
From: "James Odell" <email@example.com>
To: "ModelingTC" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2003 2:21 PM
Subject: [Modeling] An Agent UML Profile
> On 6/24/03 4:07 AM, "Dr. Hong Zhu" indited:
> > It seems that you have already had a 'core UML 2.0', while I am trying
> > figure out what people in this mailing list would define the core.
> One of the primary philosophies of the FIPA Modeling TC is: "Instead of
> reliance on the OMG's UML, we intend to reuse of UML
> wherever it makes sense. We do not want to be restricted by UML;
> we only want to capitalize on it where we can. The general philosophy,
> then, is: When it makes sense to reuse portions of UML, then do it;
> when it doesn't make sense to use UML, use something else or
> create something new."
> After twenty-five years of metamodeling engineering, my experience is that
> you don't want to continue to throw the whole thing up in the air and
> again. Based on the experience of other TC members, this is why the
> Modeling TC decided to use the UML 2.0 metamodel "wherever it makes
> It was also the sense of the TC in Palermo that the following approach
> be used:
> 1) Specify those metamodel constructs that are needed to support agents,
> reusing what makes sense from the UML 2.0 metamodel.
> 2) Define an AUML profile on UML 2.0. A Profile enables metaclasses from
> existing metamodels to be extended to adapt them for different purposes.
> This includes the ability to tailor the UML metamodel for different
> platforms or domains. The profiles mechanism does not allow for modifying
> existing metamodels. Rather, the intention of profiles is to give a
> straightforward mechanism for adapting an existing metamodel
> with constructs that are specific to a particular domain, platform, or
> method. Each such adaption is grouped in a profile. It is not possible to
> take away any of the constraints that apply to a metamodel such as UML
> a profile, but it is possible to add new constraints that are specific to
> the profile. The only other restrictions are those inherent in the
> profiles mechanism; there is nothing else that is intended to limit the
> in which a metamodel is customized.
> The result, then, would be an Agent UML Profile. Such an approach would
> enable us to reuse/extend already-existing mechanisms available in UML
> development tools -- which will hopefully make our task easier, better,
> So, this is the approach we thought made sense in Palermo. The Modeling
> can change this at any time. But, until then, I think we should proceed
> this matter. If any of you would like to change this approach, then let's
> discuss it now before we get much further. Any thoughts?
> Modeling mailing list