It all began at the IBM L 1973–1974. I will reminisce of how VDM, the Vienna Development Method, emerged. We were to develop a compiler for PL/I. In Feb. 1974 IBM HQ curtailed this and related projects. So three of the co-developers of VDM went abroad. Peter Lucas to the US, Cliff Jones via Brussels back to the UK, and I to Denmark. With students and later, at Dansk Datamatik Center (DDC), we then developed compilers for CHILL and Ada according to the IBM Lab. Vienna ideas. They led to the design of the RAISE (Rigorous Approach to Industrial SE) Method—with RSL (the Raise Specification Language). As UN Director of the UN University’s Intl. Inst. for Software Technology, in Macau, 1991–1997, we pursued Formal Methods and their theoretical underpinnings, and applied Formal Methods to the development of systems for railways (in China), finance ministry (Vietnam), country wide telephone system (The Philippines), multi-script documents (for Mongolia), and so on. I will survey these projects – emphasizing how Domain Modeling emerged. I will then outline recent work, since my retirement, at age 70 in 2007, in Domain Science and Engineering. I will end the article by “revealing” my “emergence” as a scientist from being an engineer/researcher.

An attempt is made to record events leading up to the The 0'th PEPM Event: the October 1987 Partial Evaluation and Mixed Computation IFIP TC2 Working Conference at Gl. Avernæs, Denmark.

We present a method for analysing and describing domains . By a domain we shall understand a rationally describable segment of a human assisted reality, i.e., of the world, its physical parts: natural [“God-given”] and artifactual [“human-made”], and living species : plants and animals including, notably, humans . These are endurants (“still”), as well as perdurants (“alive”). Emphasis is placed on “ human-assistedness ,” that is, that there is at least one (human-made) artifact and, therefore, that humans are a primary cause for change of endurant states as well as perdurant behaviours . By a method we shall mean a set of principles of analysis and for selecting and applying a number of techniques and tools in the construction of some artifact, say a domain description. We shall present a method for constructing domain descriptions. Among the tools we shall only be concerned with are the analysis and synthesis languages. Domain science and engineering marks a new area of computing science . Just as we are formalising the syntax and semantics of programming languages , so we are formalising the syntax and semantics of human-assisted domains . Just as physicists are studying the natural physical world , endowing it with mathematical models , so we, computing scientists , are studying these domains , endowing them with mathematical models , A difference between the endeavours of physicists and ours lies in the tools: The physics models are based on classical mathematics , differential equations and integrals , and so on; our models are based on mathematical logic , set theory , and algebra [1]. Where physicists thus classically use a variety of differential and integral calculi to model the physical world, we shall be using the analysis and description calculi presented in this article to model primarily artifactual domains.

Abstract We show that manifest domains, an understanding of which are a prerequisite for software requirements prescriptions, can be precisely described: narrated and formalised. We show that such manifest domains can be understood as a collection of endurant, that is, basically spatial entities: parts, components and materials, and perdurant, that is, basically temporal entities: actions, events and behaviours. We show that parts can be modeled in terms of external qualities whether: atomic or composite parts, having internal qualities: unique identifications, mereologies, which model relations between parts, and attributes. We show that the manifest domain analysis endeavour can be supported by a calculus of manifest domain analysis prompts: is_entity, is_endurant, is_perdurant, is_part, is_component, is_material, is_atomic, is_composite, has_components, has_materials, has_concrete_type, attribute_names, is_stationary, etcetera; and show how the manifest domain description endeavour can be supported by a calculus of manifest domain description prompts: observe_part_sorts, observe_part_type, observe_components, observe_materials, observe_unique_identifier, observe_mereology, observe_attributes. We show how to model attributes, essentially following Michael Jackson (Software requirements & specifications: a lexicon of practice, principles and prejudices. ACM Press, Addison-Wesley, Reading, 1995 ), but with a twist: The attribute model introduces the attribute analysis prompts is_static_attribute, is_dynamic_attribute, is_inert_attribute, is_reactive_attribute, is_active_attribute, is_autonomous_attribute, is_biddable_attribute and is_programmable_attribute. The twist suggests ways of modeling “access” to the values of these kinds of attributes: the static attributes by simply“copying”them, once, the reactive and programmable attributes by“carrying”them as function parameters whose values are kept always updated, and the remaining, the external_attributes, by inquiring, when needed, as to their value, as if they were always offered on CSP-like channels (Hoare, Communicating sequential processes. C.A.R. Hoare series in computer science. Prentice-Hall International, London, 2004 ). We show how to model essential aspects of perdurants in terms of their signatures based on the concepts of endurants. And we show how one can “compile” descriptions of endurant parts into descriptions of perdurant behaviours. We do not show prompt calculi for perdurants. The above contributions express a method with principles, techniques and tools for constructing domain descriptions. It is important to realise that we do not wish to nor claim that the method can describe all that it is interesting to know about domains.

This paper discusses how to model digital licenses as observational transition systems (OTSs) with CafeOBJ, a formal algebraic specification language. To extend the concept of licensing to cover various application domains of digital rights management, we first analyze the concepts of permission and obligation with some real-world examples which are not covered by current XML-based Rights Expression Languages (RELs), and then discuss how to formally specify licenses in terms of deontic and temporal logic with OTS/CafeOBJ method. Several important deontic and temporal modeling issues of licenses are also addressed for discussion. The proposed formal license language can be used not only for the formal specifications of licenses which capture both static observations and dynamic state transitions of the licenses, but also for the formal verification of licenses thanks to the executability and theorem proving facility of CafeOBJ.

No abstract available.

We shall touch upon four issues of software engineering (SE): domain engineering, formal techniques, SE sociology, and academic software architects. First, before software can be designed one must understand its requirements; but before requirements can be formulated one must understand the domain. So we assume that requirements development is based on first having established models of the (application) domain. We illustrate facets of the railway domain. Second, we touch upon all of the three phases: domain engineering, requirements engineering and software design also being done formally, however "lite". Third, despite 35 years of formal methods, the SE industry, maturity-wise still lags far behind that of other engineering disciplines. So we examine why. Finally, in several areas, in health care, in architecture, and others, we see that major undertakings are primarily spearheaded by senior academic staff. Professors of medicine daily perform specialized surgery and treatments at hospitals. Professors of architecture design new, daring buildings for industry, and professors of civil engineering head the engineering structural design of new, daring bridges. So we speculate what a similar approach would entail for SE. The paper is provocative, it postulates, but most claims are not (but can and will be) substantiated.

We attempt formal characterisations of M.A. Jackson's (1995) concept of problem frames-and illustrate the translation (JSP), control, information systems, connection and workpiece frames. The paper is based on the following definition of method: A set of principles for selecting and applying techniques and tools in order to efficiently develop an efficient (here software) artifact. Most "formal methods" fail this definition-and we wish to show how formal design calculi can fit into the above definition. The paper is also based on the tri-partite separation of concern wherein software development is seen as having three intertwined "stages/activities" : Domain analysis and theory construction, in which formal models of the application domain-without any reference to computing-"precedes" requirements capture which again "precedes" software design.

We delineate a fine-grained approach to the development of embedded computing systems, including such which exhibit real-time properties