Abstract
There has been a growing interest in Domain-Specific Visual Modeling Languages (DSVL) and their support for domain understanding and communication. However, the quality of these languages fundamentally depends on how well their structure reflects the structure of the abstractions constituting the underlying domain conceptualization. Since a well-founded domain ontology aims at faithfully representing a domain, it can be seen the ideal input for engineering a DSVL. In this paper, we present an experiment that analyses the performance of computer students in interpreting instance models by varying the concrete syntax of the language used. We contrast a generic notation (UML-based notation for object diagrams) and a domain specific notation that was designed based on a well-founded ontology for the domain of organizational structures. The hypothesis is that the performance of participants in interpreting the models using the domain specific notation is better than those who do it through a generic notation. Performance is evaluated by taking response time and correctness of the answers into account. The results confirm, but also contradict the hypothesis initially formulated.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Mylopoulos, J.: Conceptual Modeling and Telos. In: Loucopoulos, P., Zicari, R. (eds.) Conceptual Modeling, Databases, and Case: An Integrated View of Information Sytems Development, pp. 49–68. Wiley (1992)
Avison, D.E., Fitzgerald, G.: Information Systems Development: Methodologies, Techniques and Tools. McGraw Hill, Oxford (2003)
Moody, D.L.: The “Physics” of Notations: Toward a Scientific Basis for Constructing Visual Notations in Software Engineering. IEEE TSE 35(6), 1–22 (2009)
Tolvanen, J.-P., Gray, J., Rossi, M.: Preface: A Special Issue on Domain-Specific Modeling with Visual Languages. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing (2004)
Gurr, C.A.: Effective Diagrammatic Communication: Syntactic, Semantic and Pragmatic Issues. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing 10(4), 317–342 (1999)
Guizzardi, G.: Ontology-Based Evaluation and Design of Visual Conceptual Modeling Languages. In: Reinhartz-Berger, I., Sturm, A., Clark, T., Cohen, S., Bettin, J. (eds.) Domain Engineering. Product Lines, Languages and Conceptual Models, p. 345. Springer, New York (2013)
Goodman, N.: Languages of Art: An Approach to a Theory of Symbols. Bobbs-Merril Co., Indianapolis (1968)
Guizzardi, G., Wagner, G., Guarino, N., van Sinderen, M.: An Ontologically Well-Founded Profile for UML Conceptual Models. In: Persson, A., Stirna, J. (eds.) CAiSE 2004. LNCS, vol. 3084, pp. 112–126. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)
Shimojima, A.: Operational Constraints in Diagrammatic Reasoning. In: Logical Reasoning with Diagrams, pp. 27–48 (1996)
Briguente, A.C., Falbo, R.A., Guizzardi, G.: Using a Foundational Ontology for Reengineering a Software Process Ontology. Journal of Information and Data Management (2012)
Gonçalves, B., Guizzardi, G., Filho, J.G.P.: Using an ECG Reference Ontology for Semantic Interoperability. Journal of Biomedical Informatics 43 (2010)
Guizzardi, G.: Ontological Foundations for Structural Conceptual Models. Telematica Instituut, Enschede, The Netherlands (2005)
Guizzardi, G., Wagner, G.: Using the Unified Foundational Ontology (UFO) as a Foundation for General Conceptual Modeling Languages. In: Theory and Application of Ontology. Springer, Berlin (2010)
Guizzardi, G.: Modal Aspects of Object types and Part-Whole Relations and the de re/de dicto distinction. In: Krogstie, J., Opdahl, A.L., Sindre, G. (eds.) CAiSE 2007. LNCS, vol. 4495, pp. 5–20. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)
Guizzardi, G.: The Problem of Transitivity of Part-Whole Relations in Conceptual Modeling Revisited. In: van Eck, P., Gordijn, J., Wieringa, R. (eds.) CAiSE 2009. LNCS, vol. 5565, pp. 94–109. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)
Ware, C.: Visual Thinking for Design. Morgan Kaufmann (2008)
Tversky, B., Hemenway, K.: Objects, Parts and Categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology 113, 169–193 (1984)
Moody, D., van Hillegersberg, J.: Evaluating the Visual Syntax of UML: An Analysis of the Cognitive Effectiveness of the UML Family of Diagrams. In: Gašević, D., Lämmel, R., Van Wyk, E. (eds.) SLE 2008. LNCS, vol. 5452, pp. 16–34. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)
Juristo, N., Moreno, A.M.: Basics of Software Engineering Experimentation. Springer Publishing Company, Incorporated (2001)
Wade, A., Koutoumanou, E.: Statistics Research & Methodology, https://epilab.ich.ucl.ac.uk/coursematerial/statistics/index.html
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
da Silva Teixeira, M.d.G., de Almeida Falbo, R., Guizzardi, G. (2013). Can Ontologies Systematically Help in the Design of Domain-Specific Visual Languages?. In: Meersman, R., et al. On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems: OTM 2013 Conferences. OTM 2013. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 8185. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-41030-7_54
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-41030-7_54
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-41029-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-41030-7
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)