1. Aldawud, O., Elrad, T., Bader, A.: A UML Profile for Aspect Oriented Modeling. Proceedings of OOPSLA 2001 Workshop on Advanced Separation of Concerns in Object-Oriented Systems, (2001). Available athttp://www.cs.ubc.ca/~kdvolder/Workshops/OOPSLA2001/submissions/26-aldawud.pdf

2. The Aspect-Oriented Software Development Web site.http://www.aosd.net/

3. AspectJ Web Site.http://www.eclipse.org/aspectj/

4. Baniassad, E., Clarke, S.: Theme: an approach for aspect-oriented analysis and design. 26th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE 2004), IEEE Computer Society, 2004, pp. 158–167 (2004)

5. Bouge, L., Francez, N.: A Compositional Approach to Superimposition. Proceedings of the 15th ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, 1998, pp. 240–249 (1998)

6. Barber, K.S., Graser, T.J., Jernigan, S.R.: Increasing Opportunities for Reuse through Tool and Methodology Support for Enterprise-wide Requirements Reuse and Evolution. Proc. of the 1st International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems, 1999, pp.~383–390 (1999)

7. Back R.J.R. and Kurki-Suonio R. (1989). Decentralization of process nets with centralized control.Distrib. Comput. 3: 73–87

   Article  Google Scholar 

8. Booch, G.: Object-oriented analysis and design with application. Benjamin/Cummings Publishing Company, Inc. (1994)

9. Bosch J. (1999). Superimposition: a component adaptation technique.Inf. Softw. Tech. 41(5): 257–273

   Article MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

10. Constantinides, C.A., Bader, A., Elrad, T.: An Aspect-Oriented Design Framework for Concurrent Systems. Proceedings of the European Conference on Object-Oriented Programming (ECOOP), 1999, pp. 340–352

11. Clarke, S.: Extending standard UML with model composition semantics. Sci. Comput. Program.44 (1), 71–100 (2002).http://www.cs.tcd.ie/people/Siobhan.Clarke/papers/SoCP2001.pdf

12. Clarke, S., Baniassad, E.: Aspect-oriented analysis and design: the theme approach. The Addison-Wesley Object Technology Series (2005)

13. Clarke, S., Walker, R.J.: Composition patterns: an approach to designing reusable aspects. Proceedings of the International Conference on Software Engineering, pp. 5–14 (2001)

14. Dori D. (2002). Object-process methodology—a holistic systems paradigm. Springer, Heidelberg

    Google Scholar 

15. Dori D. (2002). Why significant UML change is unlikely.Commun. ACM 45(11): 82–85

    Article  Google Scholar 

16. Dori, D., Reinhartz-Berger, I., Sturm A.: OPCAT—A Bimodal Case Tool for Object-Process Based System Development. 5th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems (ICEIS 2003), 2003. Software download site:http://www.opcat.com/

17. D’Souza, D., Wills, A.C.: Objects, frameworks and components with UML—the catalysis approach. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1998)

18. Eckstein, S., Ahlbrecht, P., Neumann, K.: Increasing Reusability in Information Systems Development by Applying Generic Methods. Proceedings of the 13th International Conference CAiSE’01, LNCS 2068, 2001, pp. 251–266 (2001)

19. Early Aspect website: Aspect-Oriented Requirements Engineering and Architecture Design.http://www.early-aspects.net/

20. Frakes W. and Terry C. (1996). Software reuse: metrics and models.ACM Comput. Surv. 28(2): 415–435

    Article  Google Scholar 

21. Gomma H. (2004). Designing software product lines with UML: from use cases to pattern-based software Architectures. Addison Wesley, Reading

    Google Scholar 

22. Gamma E., Helm R. and Johnson R. Vlissides J.O. (1995). Design patterns. Addison-Wesley, Reading

    Google Scholar 

23. Griss M., Favaro J., d’Alessandro M. Integrating Feature Modeling with the RSEB, Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Software Reuse, pp. 76–85 (1998).http://www.favaro.net/john/home/publications/rseb.pdf

24. Grundy J. (2000). Multi-perspective specification, design and implementation of software components using aspects.Int. J. Softw. Eng. Knowl. Eng. 10(6): 713–734

    Article  Google Scholar 

25. Gurp, J.V., Bosch, J., Svahnberg, M.: On the Notion of Variability in Software Product Lines, Working IEEE/IFIP Conference on Software Architecture (WISCA’01), 2001, pp. 45–54 (2001)

26. IBM Corp. SOA and Web Services.http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/webservices/newto/

27. Kande, M.M.: A concern-oriented approach to software architecture. Computer Science, vol. PhD. Lausanne, Switzerland: Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (EPFL) (2003). Available athttp://biblion.epfl.ch/EPFL/theses/2003/2796/EPFL_TH2796.pdf

28. Katara, M., Katz, S.: A concern architecture view for aspect-oriented software design. Software and system modeling, Springer, (2006). doi:10.1007/s10270-006-0032-x

29. Katz S. (1993). A superimposition control construct for distributed systems.ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 15(2): 337–356

    Article  Google Scholar 

30. Keedy, L., Heinlein, C., Menger, G.: The Timor Programming Language.http://www.jlkeedy.net/timor-programming_language.html

31. Kiczales, G., Lamping, J., Mendhekar, A., Maeda, C., Lopes, C., Loingtier, J., M., Irwin, J. Aspect-Oriented Programming. European Conference on Object-Oriented Programming (ECOOP’97). LNCS 1241, pp. 220–242 (1997)

32. Kulesza, U., Garcia, A., Lucena, C. Towards a method for the development of aspect-oriented generative approaches, Early Aspects workshop, OOPSLA’2004 (2004). Available athttp://trese.cs.utwente.nl/workshops/oopsla-early-aspects-2004/Papers/KuleszaEtAl.pdf

33. Lester, N.G., Wilkie, F.G., Bustard, D.W.: Applying UML Extensions to Facilitate Software Reuse. The Unified Modeling Language (UML’98) - Beyond the Notation. LNCS 1618, pp. 393–405 (1998)

34. Lowy, J.: Contexts in .NET: Decouple Components by Injecting Custom Services into Your Object’s Interception Chain, MSDN Magazine—The Microsoft Journal for Developers (2003). Available athttp://msdn.microsoft.com/msdnmag/issues/03/03/ContextsinNET/#S1

35. Mahapatra, S.: Programming restrictions on EJB, Java World (2000). Available athttp://www.javaworld.com/javaworld/jw-08-2000/jw-0825-ejbrestrict.html

36. Mapelsden, D., Hosking, J., Grundy, J.: Design Patterns Modelling and Instantiation using DPML. 40th International Conference on Technology of Object-Oriented Languages and Systems (TOOLS), (2002).http://www.jrpit.flinders.edu.au/confpapers/CRPITV10Mapelsden.pdf

37. Mens, T., Lucas, C., Steyaert, P.: Giving Precise Semantics to Reuse and Evolution in UML. Proc. PSMT’98 Workshop on Precise Semantics for Modeling Techniques (1998)

38. Mezini, M., Lieberherr, K.: Adaptive Plug-and-Play Components for Evolutionary Software Development. Conference on Object-Oriented Programming, Systems, Languages and Applications (OOPSLA), pp. 97–116 (1998)

39. Mili H., Mili F. and Mili A. (1995). Reusing software: issues and research directions.IEEE. trans. Softw. Eng. 21(5): 528–562

    Article  Google Scholar 

40. Object Management Group: Object Constraint Language, Version 2.0 (2005)

41. Object Management Group: The Unified Modeling Language (UML ™), version 2.0 (2005)

42. Papazoglou, M.P.: Service-oriented computing: concepts, characteristics and directions, Proceedings of the 4th IEEE International Conference on Web Information Systems Engineering (WISE’2003), pp. 3–12 (2003)

43. Peleg M. and Dori D. (1999). Extending the Object-Process Methodology to handle real-time systems.J. Object. Oriented. Program. 11(8): 53–58

    Google Scholar 

44. Peleg, M., Dori, D.: The model multiplicity problem: experimenting with real-time specification methods. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 26(8), pp. 742–759 (2000).http://iew3.technion.ac.il:8080/Home/Users/dori/Model_Multiplicity_Paper.pdf

45. Reinhartz-Berger, I.: Conceptual Modeling of Structure and Behavior with UML—The Top Level Object-Oriented Framework (TLOOF) Approach, the 24th International Conference on Conceptual Modeling (ER’2005), Lecture Notes in Computer Science 3716, pp. 1–15 (2005)

46. Reinhartz-Berger, I., Dori, D.: Object-Process Methodology (OPM) vs. UML: A Code Generation Perspective, Evaluating Modeling Methods for System Analysis and Design (EMMSAD’04), Proceeding of CAiSE’04 Workshops, vol. 1, 1004, pp. 275–286

47. Reinhartz-Berger I. and Dori D. (2005). OPM vs.UML—Experimenting with comprehension and construction of web application models. Empir. Softw. Eng. 10(1): 57–80

    Google Scholar 

48. Reinhartz-Berger, I., Dori, D.: A reflective metamodel of object-process methodology. In: Green, P., Rosemann, M., (eds.) The System Modeling Building Blocks, chapter 6 in Business Systems Analysis with Ontologies, Idea Group Inc., (2005)

49. Reinhartz-Berger, I., Dori, D., Katz, S.: OPM/Web – Object-Process Methodology for Developing Web Applications. Annals on Software Engineering – Special Issue on Object-Oriented Web-based Software Engineering, pp. 141–161 (2002)

50. Schauerhuber, A., Schwinger, W., Kapsammer, E., Retschitzegger, W., Wimmer M., Kappel, G. A Survey on Aspect-Oriented Modeling Approaches (2006). Available athttp://www.bioinf.jku.at/publications/2006/1506.pdf

51. Siau K. and Cau C. (2001). Unified modeling language: a complexity analysis.J. Database Manag. 12(1): 26–34

    Google Scholar 

52. Skipper, J.F.: Assessing the Suitability of UML for Capturing and Communicating System Engineering Design Models. Vitech Corporation, 2002.http://www.vitechcorp.com/infocenter/SuitabilityOfUMLForSE_2002.pdf

53. Soffer P., Golany B., Dori D. and Wand Y. (2001). Modelling Off-the-shelf information systems requirements: an ontological approach.Requir. Eng. 6(3): 183–199

    Article MATH  Google Scholar 

54. Special Issue on Aspect-oriented Programming, Communication of the ACM,44 (10), 2001

55. Stein, D., Hanenberg, S., Unland, R.: A UML-based Aspect-Oriented Design Notation for AspectJ. Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Aspect-Oriented Software Development, ACM, pp. 106–112 (2002)

56. Sunye, G., Le Guennec, A. Jezequel, J.M.: Design Patterns Application in UML. Proceedings of the 14th European Conference on Object-Oriented Programming, LNCS 1850, pp. 44–62 (1850)

Download references