A copy of this work was available on the public web and has been preserved in the Wayback Machine. The capture dates from 2019; you can also visit <a rel="external noopener" href="https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2Fs10270-018-0694-1.pdf">the original URL</a>. The file type is <code>application/pdf</code>.
<i title="Springer Nature America, Inc">
<a target="_blank" rel="noopener" href="https://fatcat.wiki/container/dfdth37zyfetvchsdjk5e2osrq" style="color: black;">Journal of Software and Systems Modeling</a>
Our journal is called "Software and Systems Modeling," but when we look at most of the papers that have been published in SoSyM recently, the focus is much more on software than on other kinds of systems. It is worth a fresh look at how other engineering disciplines use models. In fact, modeling is at the heart of almost any engineering discipline. Thus, it is not surprising that our engineering colleagues have developed a detailed portfolio of modeling techniques to describe their systems in<span class="external-identifiers"> <a target="_blank" rel="external noopener noreferrer" href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-018-0694-1">doi:10.1007/s10270-018-0694-1</a> <a target="_blank" rel="external noopener" href="https://fatcat.wiki/release/hhjedg7ekzhclbrss6k7us7d2m">fatcat:hhjedg7ekzhclbrss6k7us7d2m</a> </span>
more »... rious perspectives, viewpoints, and abstractions. Furthermore, a plethora of tools has been developed to assist practitioners with each of the individual modeling languages. Colleagues from traditional engineering disciplines model many more aspects of their systems than software developers. However, the state-of-the-art in systems modeling has several challenges, where each modeling aspect and view is often assisted by an individual modeling and analysis tool. Data exchange between the tools is complicated, even though mostly automated, but suffers from concerns about robustness, completeness of the mappings between the models, as well as regular version upgrades of tools. A second problem is that these mappings between models are not easy to standardize, because different projects use the same modeling languages in different forms (semantics), which enforces configurable mappings or individually developed translations per project. We have discussed these aspects on modeling partially in previous editorials (please see http:// www.sosym.org/editorials/). An important aspect of a modeling toolchain concerns the "length" of the toolchain-the longer the toolchain, the more information that may be added along the toolchain, potentially reducing the agility of the development process. Agility is a well-known software development technique that dom-B Bernhard Rumpe
<a target="_blank" rel="noopener" href="https://web.archive.org/web/20190505092211/https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2Fs10270-018-0694-1.pdf" title="fulltext PDF download" data-goatcounter-click="serp-fulltext" data-goatcounter-title="serp-fulltext"> <button class="ui simple right pointing dropdown compact black labeled icon button serp-button"> <i class="icon ia-icon"></i> Web Archive [PDF] <div class="menu fulltext-thumbnail"> <img src="https://blobs.fatcat.wiki/thumbnail/pdf/60/c1/60c1e26e89f91095a39593b1e7c2693c9c2b0873.180px.jpg" alt="fulltext thumbnail" loading="lazy"> </div> </button> </a> <a target="_blank" rel="external noopener noreferrer" href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-018-0694-1"> <button class="ui left aligned compact blue labeled icon button serp-button"> <i class="external alternate icon"></i> springer.com </button> </a>