This document describes the OOWS 2.0 method, which extends the OOWS method to support the development of Web 2.0 applications. It presents three main contributions: 1) an Abstract Interaction Model for modeling user interaction, 2) a RIA Interface Metamodel for modeling advanced user interfaces using RIA technologies, and 3) Web 2.0 Patterns for representing common practices that emphasize end-user involvement. The method integrates these contributions using model-weaving techniques to establish relationships between the models. It aims to provide high support for modeling user interaction, RIA interfaces, event-driven behavior, and Web 2.0 patterns.

1. OOWS 2.0
A Model-driven Web Engineering
Method for the Development of
Web 2.0 Applications
Francisco Valverde Giromé
Oscar Pástor López
26th October 2010

2. 2
What is Web 2.0 ?
Brainstorming session for the first Web 2.0 conference

3. 2
What is Web 2.0 ?

4. 2
What is Web 2.0 ?

5. 2
What is Web 2.0 ?

6. What is Web 2.0?
3
The Tale of Two Tims

7. What is Web 2.0?
3
The Tale of Two Tims

8. What is Web 2.0?
‣ Web applications have considerably evolved.This evolution is
summarized in the term Web 2.0
‣ The Web 2.0 definition is the sum up of:
- A collaborative concern to emphasize the end-user involvement
- An advanced technological concern for simplifying user interaction
‣ Web 2.0 status: the accomplishment of both concerns to a
greater or lesser extent
4

9. Outline
1. Introduction
2. Related Works
3. Abstract Interaction Model
4. RIA Interface Modeling
5. Web 2.0 Patterns
6. Preliminary Evaluation
7. Concluding Remarks
5

10. 1. Introduction
Motivation
‣ Model-driven Web Engineering methods have improved Web
application development
‣ Web Engineering is a key requirement to support this evolution
but, are they ready for the Web 2.0?
‣ Web Engineering has been focused on solving the challenges
related to the development of the now called “Web 1.0”
applications
6

11. 1. Introduction
7
‣ With the arrival of Web 2.0 applications new challenges must be
faced:

12. 1. Introduction
1. Information synchronization between the server and the browser
7
‣ With the arrival of Web 2.0 applications new challenges must be
faced:

13. 1. Introduction
1. Information synchronization between the server and the browser
2. Multimedia support
7
‣ With the arrival of Web 2.0 applications new challenges must be
faced:

14. 1. Introduction
1. Information synchronization between the server and the browser
2. Multimedia support
3. Advanced User Interfaces
7
‣ With the arrival of Web 2.0 applications new challenges must be
faced:

15. 1. Introduction
1. Information synchronization between the server and the browser
2. Multimedia support
3. Advanced User Interfaces
4. A better responsiveness with the the UI
7
‣ With the arrival of Web 2.0 applications new challenges must be
faced:

16. 1. Introduction
1. Information synchronization between the server and the browser
2. Multimedia support
3. Advanced User Interfaces
4. A better responsiveness with the the UI
5. Mechanisms to emphasize end-user interaction
7
‣ With the arrival of Web 2.0 applications new challenges must be
faced:

17. 1. Introduction
1. Information synchronization between the server and the browser
2. Multimedia support
3. Advanced User Interfaces
4. A better responsiveness with the the UI
5. Mechanisms to emphasize end-user interaction
6. and more...
7
‣ With the arrival of Web 2.0 applications new challenges must be
faced:

18. 1. Introduction
‣ Web Engineering methods must be extended to support Web
2.0 applications development
‣ The main issues are detected in the modeling phase because
current models are not expressive enough
‣ Research main goal: provide the required conceptual models in
order to support the model-driven development of Web 2.0
applications
8

19. 1. Introduction
Q1: Which conceptual expressiveness must provide a Web Engineering
method in order to support the advanced interaction modeling for
Web 2.0 applications?
9

20. 1. Abstract Interaction Model: for expressing the user interaction
that is common in Web 2.0 applications
2. RIA Interface Metamodel: for modeling an advanced and usable
UI using a Rich Internet Applications (RIA) technology
1. Introduction
Q1: Which conceptual expressiveness must provide a Web Engineering
method in order to support the advanced interaction modeling for
Web 2.0 applications?
9

21. Q2: How can be represented into a model-driven Web Engineering
method, the most common Web 2.0 practices that emphasize
the end-user involvement?
1. Introduction
10

22. Q2: How can be represented into a model-driven Web Engineering
method, the most common Web 2.0 practices that emphasize
the end-user involvement?
Web 2.0 Patterns: a set of selected patterns from Web 2.0
applications represented as conceptual models
1. Introduction
10

23. 1. Introduction
Q3: Which are the required mechanisms for introducing the
previous solutions in the context of a model-driven Web Engineering
method?
11

24. 1. Introduction
Q3: Which are the required mechanisms for introducing the
previous solutions in the context of a model-driven Web Engineering
method?
Model-based Integration:
1. Application of weaving metamodels to establish the relationship
between interaction models and the RIA Inteface Metamodel
2. M2M strategy for integrating Web 2.0 Patterns
11

25. 1. Introduction
12
‣ The final result is the OOWS 2.0 Web Engineering method,
an original and evolutive approach to support the
development of Web 2.0 applications
‣ The method includes the three contributions presented in the
thesis using the proposed integration strategies
‣ This new method shares the general process of the OOWS
method

26. 1. Introduction
13
OOWS 2.0 Method
Process

27. 1. Introduction
13
OOWS 2.0
Conceptual Modeling
Phase

28. 1. Introduction
Comparison between OOWS and OOWS 2.0 models
14

29. Outline
1. Introduction
2. Related Works
3. Abstract Interaction Model
4. RIA Interface Modeling
5. Web 2.0 Patterns
6. Preliminary Evaluation
7. Concluding Remarks
15

30. 2. Related Works
‣ Web Engineering methods have been extended with the aim of
supporting some features related with the development of Web 2.0
applications
‣ Five methods have been analyzed:
1. WebML: (Bozzon, Comai et al. 2006), (Carughi, Comai et al. 2007)
2. RUX-Method: (Linaje, Preciado et al. 2007), (Preciado, Linaje et al. 2008)
3. OOH4RIA: (Melia, Gomez et al. 2008)
4. OOHDM: (Urbieta, Rossi et al. 2007), (Rossi, Urbieta et al. 2008)
5. UWE: (Koch, Pigerl et al. 2009)
16

31. 2. Related Works
‣ Four dimensions considered:
1. Expressiveness of the method conceptual models in order to
represent the user interaction
2. User Interface modeling based on RIA technologies
3. Definition of the Event-driven behavior of the User Interface
4. Support to patterns recurrently applied in Web 2.0 applications
17

32. 2. Related Works
18
Methods support to dimensions

33. 2. Related Works
18
WE Method 1. Interaction 2. RIA Interface 3. UI Events 4. Web 2.0 Patterns
WebML High Low Partial Partial
RUX-Method Low High High None
OOH4RIA High Partial High None
OOHDM High Partial High Low
UWE Partial Low Low Partial
Methods support to dimensions

34. 2. Related Works
18
WE Method 1. Interaction 2. RIA Interface 3. UI Events 4. Web 2.0 Patterns
WebML High Low Partial Partial
RUX-Method Low High High None
OOH4RIA High Partial High None
OOHDM High Partial High Low
UWE Partial Low Low Partial
Methods support to dimensions

35. 2. Related Works
18
WE Method 1. Interaction 2. RIA Interface 3. UI Events 4. Web 2.0 Patterns
WebML High Low Partial Partial
RUX-Method Low High High None
OOH4RIA High Partial High None
OOHDM High Partial High Low
UWE Partial Low Low Partial
Methods support to dimensions

36. 2. Related Works
18
WE Method 1. Interaction 2. RIA Interface 3. UI Events 4. Web 2.0 Patterns
WebML High Low Partial Partial
RUX-Method Low High High None
OOH4RIA High Partial High None
OOHDM High Partial High Low
UWE Partial Low Low Partial
Methods support to dimensions

37. 2. Related Works
18
WE Method 1. Interaction 2. RIA Interface 3. UI Events 4. Web 2.0 Patterns
WebML High Low Partial Partial
RUX-Method Low High High None
OOH4RIA High Partial High None
OOHDM High Partial High Low
UWE Partial Low Low Partial
Methods support to dimensions
OOWS 2.0 goal is to provide a high support for the four dimensions

38. Outline
1. Introduction
2. Related Works
3. Abstract Interaction Model
4. RIA Interface Modeling
5. Web 2.0 Patterns
6. Preliminary Evaluation
7. Concluding Remarks
19

39. Outline
1. Introduction
2. Related Works
3. Abstract Interaction Model
4. RIA Interface Modeling
5. Web 2.0 Patterns
6. Preliminary Evaluation
7. Concluding Remarks
19

40. 3. Abstract Interaction Model
‣ By interaction we mean a communication between an user
and an Information System through a User Interface in order
to accomplish a Task
‣ Describes the interaction without taking into account
technological details (Abstract) related to the User Interface
‣ Previous models, OO-Method Presentation Model and OOWS
Navigational Model, have been taken into account for defining this
new model
20

41. 3. Abstract Interaction Model
21

42. 3. Abstract Interaction Model
21
Container of the conceptual primitives which
describe the required interaction for performing
a task

43. 3. Abstract Interaction Model
21
Represents the different types of
user that can access to the system

44. 3. Abstract Interaction Model
21
For each user, it provides a view made up
of the available Interaction Contexts

45. 3. Abstract Interaction Model
21
The different Interaction Contexts are
described as an aggregation of one or
more Abstract Interaction Units (AIU)

46. 3. Abstract Interaction Model
22
!
Interaction Map

47. 3. Abstract Interaction Model
22
!
Interaction Map
User

48. 3. Abstract Interaction Model
22
!
Interaction Map
User
Interaction
Contexts

49. 3. Abstract Interaction Model
22
!
Interaction Map
User
Interaction
Contexts
First level contexts are
always accessible

50. 3. Abstract Interaction Model
22
!
Interaction Map
User
Interaction
Contexts
First level contexts are
always accessible
Sequence contexts are accessed
when a previous task is finished

51. 3. Abstract Interaction Model
23

52. 3. Abstract Interaction Model
23
Represents an information
retrieval from the IS. It is defined
as a view over the IS data entities

53. 3. Abstract Interaction Model
23
Abstracts an operation that modifies
the state of the IS. It is defined as a
view over a service input arguments

54. 3. Abstract Interaction Model
24

55. 3. Abstract Interaction Model
24
Population AIU example

56. Service AIU example
3. Abstract Interaction Model
24

57. 3. Abstract Interaction Model
25

58. 3. Abstract Interaction Model
25
Auxiliary Interaction Patterns (AIP):
constrain the behavior and/or express
more accurately the interaction
provided by an AIU

59. 3. Abstract Interaction Model
25
A set of 14 patterns extending the
previous JUST-UI pattern language

60. 3. Abstract Interaction Model
26
Example SummaryView AIP

61. 3. Abstract Interaction Model
27
Example SummaryView AIP

62. 3. Abstract Interaction Model
27
Example SummaryView AIP

63. 3. Abstract Interaction Model
27
Example SummaryView AIP

64. Outline
1. Introduction
2. Related Works
3. Abstract Interaction Model
4. RIA Interface Modeling
5. Web 2.0 Patterns
6. Preliminary Evaluation
7. Concluding Remarks
28

65. Outline
1. Introduction
2. Related Works
3. Abstract Interaction Model
4. RIA Interface Modeling
5. Web 2.0 Patterns
6. Preliminary Evaluation
7. Concluding Remarks
28

66. 1996

67. 1996 2000

68. 1996 2000 2004

69. 1996 2000 20102004

70. 1996 2000 20102004 ....

71. 4. RIA Interface Modeling
‣ The evolution of Web Interface technologies has been
decisive for encouraging the end-user involvement
‣ This technological evolution has defined a new application
paradigm: Rich Internet Applications (RIA)
‣ Since the usability of the UI is a key requirement, this paradigm is
a suitable choice for the development of Web 2.0 applications
30

72. 4. RIA Interface Modeling
‣ The main goal is to define a metamodel to support the RIA
Interface modeling in Web Engineering methods
‣ Address the UI modeling for different RIA technologies
‣ Support of two main concerns:
1. Advanced UI widgets
2. Event-driven UI behavior
31

73. 4. RIA Interface Modeling
1. Advanced UI Widgets
‣ The UI has been extended using widgets that are highly coupled
to the RIA technology
‣ Widgets can be classified according to their interactive
function with the IS
‣ Proposal: the definition of one metamodel for each RIA
technology using a common set of abstract conceptual primitives
that represent the interactive functions
32

74. 4. RIA Interface Modeling
RIA Widgets Interactive Functions
33
1. Input Data

75. 4. RIA Interface Modeling
RIA Widgets Interactive Functions
33
1. Input Data
2. Retrieve Information

76. 4. RIA Interface Modeling
RIA Widgets Interactive Functions
33
1. Input Data
2. Retrieve Information
3. Navigation

77. 4. RIA Interface Modeling
RIA Widgets Interactive Functions
33
1. Input Data
2. Retrieve Information
3. Navigation
4. Execute Services

78. 4. RIA Interface Modeling
RIA Widgets Interactive Functions
33
1. Input Data
2. Retrieve Information
3. Navigation
4. Execute Services
5. Arrange and
Group Widgets

79. 4. RIA Interface Modeling
34
A RIA Interface Model
is composed by a set of
Widgets

80. 4. RIA Interface Modeling
34
5 abstract conceptual
primitives represent the
interactive functions

81. 4. RIA Interface Modeling
34
A metamodel for the Adobe Flex
technology is created by means of
specialization relationships

82. 4. RIA Interface Modeling
34
Events are also considered in
the technological metamodel

83. 4. RIA Interface Modeling
34
RIA Interface
Metamodel
Adobe Flex Interface
Metamodel

84. 4. RIA Interface Modeling
2. Event-driven UI Behavior
‣ Changes in the UI perceived as events that happen over a
specific widget
‣ Event rule: is defined by an Event from a source widget that
triggers a Reaction associated with a target widget
‣ An XText grammar has been defined to support Event Rules
35

85. 4. RIA Interface Modeling
‣ Example: when inputting new data the client-side automatically
retrieves the values that match the input text
36
Reaction
Condition
Event

86. 4. RIA Interface Modeling
Integration in a Web Engineering Method
‣ An strategy based on weaving metamodels to connect the
method metamodels with the RIA Interface metamodel
‣ A weaving metamodel establishes the relationship between the
conceptual primitives of two metamodels that are not directly
related
‣ Neither of the two connected metamodels is modified: the
relationships between them are stored in a weaving model
37

87. 4. RIA Interface Modeling
38
Application into the OOWS 2.0 Method
Abstract Interaction
Metamodel
RIA Interface Model
(Adobe Flex)
RIA Interface
Metamodel

88. 4. RIA Interface Modeling
38
A set of weaving relationships
establish the UI interactive
function that a conceptual
primitive represents
Application into the OOWS 2.0 Method
Weaving
Relationships
Abstract Interaction
Metamodel
RIA Interface Model
(Adobe Flex)
RIA Interface
Metamodel

89. 4. RIA Interface Modeling
38
When the RIA Interface Model is
created, analysts select the
most suitable widget that
implements the interactive
function
Application into the OOWS 2.0 Method
Weaving
Relationships
Abstract Interaction
Metamodel
RIA Interface Model
(Adobe Flex)
RIA Interface
Metamodel
Instantiation

90. 4. RIA Interface Modeling
Application into the OOWS 2.0 Method
39
From an Abstract Interaction Model,
a Flex Interface Model is generated
using a default weaving model
OOWS Abstract
Interaction Model
Preliminary
Weaving Model
Preliminary
Flex UI Model
M2M Transformation
1

91. 4. RIA Interface Modeling
Application into the OOWS 2.0 Method
39
The analyst changes the Flex
Interface Model creating
new weaving relationships
with different widgets
OOWS Abstract
Interaction Model
Preliminary
Weaving Model
Preliminary
Flex UI Model
M2M Transformation
1
Flex UI Model
Weaving
Model
Abstract
Interaction Model
Analyst changes
2

92. 4. RIA Interface Modeling
Application into the OOWS 2.0 Method
39
Once the Flex Interface Model is
finished, Event Rules are included.
The 4 models are used in the code
generation process
OOWS Abstract
Interaction Model
Preliminary
Weaving Model
Preliminary
Flex UI Model
M2M Transformation
1
Flex UI Model
Weaving
Model
Abstract
Interaction Model
Analyst changes
2
Event Rules
Model
3
To code generation

93. Outline
1. Introduction
2. Related Works
3. Abstract Interaction Model
4. RIA Interface Modeling
5. Web 2.0 Patterns
6. Preliminary Evaluation
7. Concluding Remarks
40

94. Outline
1. Introduction
2. Related Works
3. Abstract Interaction Model
4. RIA Interface Modeling
5. Web 2.0 Patterns
6. Preliminary Evaluation
7. Concluding Remarks
40

95. 5. Web 2.0 Patterns
‣ In Web 2.0 applications users
are a valuable resource: a
precise and intuitive
interaction is essential
‣ Web 2.0 applications reuse
several well-know
mechanisms to simplify the
user interaction
41
Quick Comment

96. 5. Web 2.0 Patterns
‣ In Web 2.0 applications users
are a valuable resource: a
precise and intuitive
interaction is essential
‣ Web 2.0 applications reuse
several well-know
mechanisms to simplify the
user interaction
41
Suggestion

97. 5. Web 2.0 Patterns
‣ In Web 2.0 applications users
are a valuable resource: a
precise and intuitive
interaction is essential
‣ Web 2.0 applications reuse
several well-know
mechanisms to simplify the
user interaction
41
!!
Favorites

98. 5. Web 2.0 Patterns
‣ In Web 2.0 applications users
are a valuable resource: a
precise and intuitive
interaction is essential
‣ Web 2.0 applications reuse
several well-know
mechanisms to simplify the
user interaction
41
Share Content

99. 5. Web 2.0 Patterns
‣ Web 2.0 Pattern: a conceptual abstraction of a mechanism
applied in a Web 2.0 application with the aim of improving the
user interaction
‣ The utilization of 14 candidate patterns has been analyzed using
a set of popular Web 2.0 applications
42

100. 5. Web 2.0 Patterns
43

101. 5. Web 2.0 Patterns
43
0% 25% 50% 75% 100%
Quick Comment
Public Profile
Suggestion
Subscription
Notification
Quick Rating
Share Content
Favorites
Tag Definition
Collaborative Editing
Reputation
Invite
Availability
Ranking 25%
37,5%
50%
56,25%
56,25%
62,5%
68,75%
68,75%
68,75%
68,75%
75%
87,5%
93,75%
100%
% of Web 2.0 applications in which the pattern is used

102. 5. Web 2.0 Patterns
43
0% 25% 50% 75% 100%
Quick Comment
Public Profile
Suggestion
Subscription
Notification
Quick Rating
Share Content
Favorites
Tag Definition
Collaborative Editing
Reputation
Invite
Availability
Ranking 25%
37,5%
50%
56,25%
56,25%
62,5%
68,75%
68,75%
68,75%
68,75%
75%
87,5%
93,75%
100%
% of Web 2.0 applications in which the pattern is used

103. 5. Web 2.0 Patterns
‣ Web 2.0 Patterns are usually described using a textual pattern
template: Name, Problem, Rationale, Contexts of use, Solution and
Example
‣ We propose the use of conceptual models in order to formalize
the pattern semantics:
1. Functionality Model
2. Interaction Model
44

104. 5. Web 2.0 Patterns
‣ Notification Pattern: inform the user about the changes in the
application since the last visit
45
Functionality
Model

105. 5. Web 2.0 Patterns
‣ Notification Pattern: inform the user about the changes in the
application since the last visit
45
Notification
Application
event *
Notification
creation
User
notifications
List user
notifications
Select
notification
Notification
operation
Discard
notification
View
notification*
Store user
notification
state
[ ] >> >>
||| [ ] >>
[ >
[ ] >>
Notification
Application
event *
Notification
creation
User
notifications
List user
notifications
Select
notification
Notification
operation
Discard
notification
View
notification*
Store user
notification
state
[ ] >> >>
||| [ ] >>
[ >
[ ] >>
Interaction
Model

106. 5. Web 2.0 Patterns
Integration
‣ An strategy that reuse the current conceptual primitives from
Web Engineering methods
‣ Each Web 2.0 Pattern is represented by means of a method-
specific model (M’) that is derived from the functionality and
interaction models
‣ When the pattern is applied, an underlying M2M
transformation generates the M’ model
46

107. 5. Web 2.0 Patterns
Integration Strategy Proposed
47
Conceptual
Primitive A
Conceptual
Primitive B
Conceptual
Primitive C
Metamodel Level
0..1
*
Web 2.0 Pattern
Conceptual
Primitive
1
Methodological
Extension Point
The method metamodel must contain a
conceptual primitive that represents the
Web 2.0 Pattern to be introduced.

108. 5. Web 2.0 Patterns
Integration Strategy Proposed
47
Conceptual
Primitive A
Conceptual
Primitive B
Conceptual
Primitive C
Metamodel Level
0..1
*
Web 2.0 Pattern
Conceptual
Primitive
1
Methodological
Extension Point
The pattern must be related by means of a
unary relationship to, at least, another
conceptual primitive of the metamodel

109. 5. Web 2.0 Patterns
48
Integration Strategy Proposed
The purpose of the transformation
is to substitute the conceptual
primitive that represents the
pattern by a method model
Model Level
M
M2M
Pattern
Conceptual Primitive

110. 5. Web 2.0 Patterns
48
Integration Strategy Proposed
M’ defines the underlying models
that are actually used when the
pattern is applied
Model Level
M
M2M
Pattern
Conceptual Primitive
M'
Functionality
Model
Interaction
Model
Specific Model
of the Method

111. 5. Web 2.0 Patterns
48
Integration Strategy Proposed
As the pattern is described using a
method model, code generation
rules can be reused
Model Level
M
M2M
Pattern
Conceptual Primitive
M'
Functionality
Model
Interaction
Model
Specific Model
of the Method
Code level
M2C
Pattern code

112. 5. Web 2.0 Patterns
49
Application into the OOWS 2.0 Method
!

113. 5. Web 2.0 Patterns
50
Application into the OOWS 2.0 method
!

114. 5. Web 2.0 Patterns
50
Application into the OOWS 2.0 method
ATL
Transformations
!
!

115. Outline
1. Introduction
2. Related Works
3. Abstract Interaction Model
4. RIA Interface Modeling
5. Web 2.0 Patterns
6. Preliminary Evaluation
7. Concluding Remarks
51

116. 6. Preliminary Evaluation
‣ Viability evaluation as a necessary step before the full
implementation of the technological infrastructure
‣ A lab demo based on a bioinformatic Web 2.0 application,
23andMe
1. Application not related to the social Web domain
2. Usable user interface created using RIA technologies
3. Complex enough to evaluate a Web Engineering Method
52

117. 6. Preliminary Evaluation
‣ Tasks performed:
1. Analysis of the interface and interaction modeling improvement
over OOWS models
2. Modeling of two real scenarios to test the contributions proposed
3. Experiment design for a full evaluation
53

118. 6. Preliminary Evaluation
1. Analysis of the modeling improvement
‣ A set of 18 scenarios have been selected from the 23andMe lab
demo
‣ It has been analysed if the required interaction and interface
for each scenario can be modelled using OOWS or OOWS 2.0
models
54

119. 6. Preliminary Evaluation
55
OOWS
OOWS 2.0
0% 25,00% 50,00% 75,00% 100,00%
Interaction
Interface
Interaction
Interface
66,67% 33,33%
Modeling support for the 23andMe lab demo
Supported Partial Not Supported

120. 6. Preliminary Evaluation
55
OOWS
OOWS 2.0
0% 25,00% 50,00% 75,00% 100,00%
Interaction
Interface
Interaction
Interface
66,67% 33,33%
22,22% 50,00% 27,78%
Modeling support for the 23andMe lab demo
Supported Partial Not Supported

121. 6. Preliminary Evaluation
55
OOWS
OOWS 2.0
0% 25,00% 50,00% 75,00% 100,00%
Interaction
Interface
Interaction
Interface
66,67% 33,33%
22,22% 50,00% 27,78%
94,44% 5,56%
Modeling support for the 23andMe lab demo
Supported Partial Not Supported

122. 6. Preliminary Evaluation
55
OOWS
OOWS 2.0
0% 25,00% 50,00% 75,00% 100,00%
Interaction
Interface
Interaction
Interface
66,67% 33,33%
22,22% 50,00% 27,78%
94,44% 5,56%
77,78% 22,22%
Modeling support for the 23andMe lab demo
Supported Partial Not Supported

123. 6. Preliminary Evaluation
56
2. Compare genes scenario modeling

124. 6. Preliminary Evaluation
‣ Used to test the RIA Interface Model because describes a rich and
highly interactive UI
‣ RIA Interface Model made up of:
1. A weaving model with 11 specific relationships to design the UI
2. 4 Event Rules are defined to describe the UI behavior
57

125. 6. Preliminary Evaluation
58
2. 23andMe community scenario modeling

126. 6. Preliminary Evaluation
‣ A collaborative scenario used to evaluate the Abstract
Interaction Model and the Web 2.0 Patterns
‣ The interaction requires the definition of 7 AIU
‣ Using 3 Web 2.0 Patterns (Quick Comment, Public Profile and
Favorite) the same interaction is achieved
‣ Reduces the complexity of the required interaction model
59

127. 6. Preliminary Evaluation
3. Experiment Design
‣ Goal: evaluate the improvement and temporal impact using the OOWS
2.0 method with regards to the OOWS method
‣ Metrics: modeling time and conceptual expressiveness provided by the
models
‣ Process: subjects model two scenarios from the lab demo using the
OOWS and the OOWS 2.0 methods
‣ Instruments: surveys gather the user experience about the
usefulness of the conceptual primitives and also, the time to
accomplish the modeling tasks
60

128. 6. Preliminary Evaluation
Lessons Learned
‣ A 50% additional scenarios from the lab demo are fully
supported by the OOWS 2.0 models
‣ The use of Web 2.0 Patterns simplifies the complexity of the
interaction models
‣ Initial hypothesis suggest that using the OOWS 2.0 method,
conceptual expressiveness should increase and the Web 2.0
applications development should improve
‣ Because of the more complex modeling process, efficiency may be
affected
61

129. Outline
1. Introduction
2. Related Works
3. Abstract Interaction Model
4. RIA Interface Modeling
5. Web 2.0 Patterns
6. Preliminary Evaluation
7. Concluding Remarks
62

130. 7. Concluding Remarks
1. The definition of a new Abstract Interaction Model
‣ The model not only defines the interaction, but also how to
connect with the IS business logic
‣ Extended version of the conceptual expressiveness validated in
the context of the OOWS and OO-Method approaches
‣ The final purpose is the systematic code generation
63

131. 7. Concluding Remarks
2. The specification of a RIA Interface metamodel
‣ A model-based approach to support different RIA technologies
‣ Supports both the RIA Interface design and the Event-driven
UI behavior
‣ Transparent integration with Web Engineering methods by
means of weaving models
64

132. 7. Concluding Remarks
3. Modeling of Web 2.0 Patterns
‣ An analysis of the Web 2.0 Patterns utilization in real applications
‣ Because proposed models are based on well-know modeling
languages, knowledge can be shared
‣ Web 2.0 Patterns formalized as M2M transformations
65

133. 7. Concluding Remarks
Related Research Publications
66

134. 7. Concluding Remarks
Related Research Publications
66
1. Valverde, F., Panach, I., Aquino, N., Pastor, O.: Dealing with Abstract Interaction Modelling in an
MDE Development Process: a Pattern-based Approach. New Trends on Human-Computer
Interaction. Springer, London (2009)
2. Valverde, F., Pastor, O., Valderas, P., Pelechano, V.: A Model-Driven Engineering Approach for
Defining Rich Internet Applications: a Web 2.0 Case Study: Handbook of Research on Web 2.0, 3.0,
and X.0: Technologies, Business, and Social Applications. Information Science Reference (2009)
3. Valverde, F., Pastor, O.: Facing the Technological Challenges of Web 2.0: A RIA Model-Driven
Engineering Approach: Web Information Systems Engineering - WISE 2009, Vol. 5802. Springer
(2009)

135. 7. Concluding Remarks
Future Work
‣ Perform the proposed evaluation
‣ Application of the OOWS 2.0 method in a real development
project
‣ Development of a OOWS 2.0 support tool
‣ Web 2.0 applications integration by means of REST Services
‣ Application of the contributions in another Web Engineering
methods
67

136. 68
Thanks for your attention
FranciscoValverde Giromé
fvalverde@pros.upv.es