Talk:Model-driven engineering

Merge with "Model-Driven Software Development" or clarify the purpose of "Model Driven Engineering"
Current "Model-Driven Engineering" article starts with the words "software development methodology". Are other engineers not allowed to do model-driven engineering? The rest of the article does go on to talk as if this were applicable to engineering at large, but the intro sentence limits applicability to software only.

Older versions of this article DO state it's applicable to a much larger domain - I highly recommend changing the intro back to a version from around May 21, 2008 (before Gordon.Morrison deleted everyone but software). Anyone else? Garykempen (talk) 23:44, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Model ... not defined?
I find it disappointing that those that offer "encyclopedic" descriptions of "model driven engineering" simply fail to define "model". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.253.65.3 (talk) 05:37, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Model Driven Development trademark abandoned
According to a search of the US Patent and Trademark Office web, the word mark "Model Driven Development" was filed by the OMG on 18 Aug. 2003 and abandoned on 13 Sept. 2004. The current Live/Dead Indicator for this word mark is "Dead". Consequently, this commonly used expression and its associated acronym (MDD) should not be erroneously labeled as a live trademark.
 * Still the OMG seems to list MDD as an official trademak. See . Who should we believe?

MS DSL tools
The sentence "Microsoft has its own MDE solution called DSL Tools" is disputable -- At first, MS's overall approach is called "Software factories", a development framework for software product lines, the DSL tools are just a part (though potentially the most important one) of this. Then, "Software factories" isn't promoted as a "model-first(-and-only)"-approach ... in this way, MS's DSLs aren't real modeling languages (in the sense that they don't systematically support underspecification, stepwise refinement, scaling etc.): I would coin them more generally as "visual specification languages" (allowing precise -- thus, executable -- specifications of domain tasks). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 134.169.13.19 (talk • contribs).


 * I don't really know enough about DSL tools to comment one way or another. But please feel free to add this viewpoint to the article (ideally with some references to back it up). Wikipedia tries to provide a neutral point of view. --Allan McInnes (talk) 16:08, 26 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I would suggest writing instead: "Microsoft has its own MDE solution called Software factories and partially implemented by the DSL Tools. As suggested by the name, the Microsoft vision is quite related to Domain Specific Languages". This seems to synthetise the two views expressed and furthermore it is a neutral presentation of the current situation.Lausac 04:18, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

How is this related to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Model-driven_architecture? 21:41, 28 June 2006 (GMT+1)
 * MDA is a type of MDE. Specifically, MDA is the OMG-endorsed version of MDE. --Allan McInnes (talk) 19:56, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Is this really encyclopedic?
I've already added a comment along the same lines to the talk page for Platform-specific model.

Does it really make sense to have a big collection of articles for terms which, outside of specific OMG standards (MDA in this case), have no interesting non-generic applicability or meaning?

Jimg (talk) 11:47, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

On the contrary; the more ineteresting article would be this one about the general concept MDE rather than a specific choice of implementation. It does certainly have applicability outside of that specific. See e.g. RISE Editor and other modern information system development tools.

However; this article does need to be improved in many ways to be really useful. E.g. it still states drawbacks with MDE (the out-of-sync issue) as being a problem with MDE while it is only an issue with old ways of using it and old tools.

Engineering artifact?
Model-driven engineering (MDE) is the systematic use of models as primary engineering artifacts throughout the engineering lifecycle.

What is an engineering artifact? --Abdull (talk) 20:06, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Typical examples would be documents (e.g. specifications, manuals, etc), models, code, binaries, and so on. Basically anything created throughout the engineering process of creating the software. Reading Artifact (software development) might be helpful. 130.237.57.80 (talk) 13:23, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Disputes in MDE
I gather that experts disagree over how many meta-levels are best and whether UML-like or non-UML based DSLs are better. Am I correct? Should this be in the article, and, if so, what should be cited? -- RLV 151.190.254.108 (talk) 10:28, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Request for feedback (Portofino framework)
I've written a new article about Portofino, an open-source web application framework written in Java and based on model-driven engineering.

The framework was mentioned in the Model-driven engineering article (as "ManyDesigns Portofino"), so I would kindly ask anybody interested in the subject to review my article and provide some feedback.

I'm keeping the article under my personal page during the review process.

Predonzani (talk) 09:58, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Replacing the term "application domain" with "problem domain"
I propose to replace in this article the term application domain with the term problem domain. Is it Ok?

DmitryMedvedev (talk) 16:09, 2 February 2012 (UTC)