Fluent Interface for System.Identity – The Basics

<Author’s Note> A very talented Developer I know just recently gave me some very succinct feedback on my blog – “good blog…too long”. As I respect this Developer’s opinion quite highly (not to mention I always try to listen to Developers), I am going to start putting his suggestion into practice by chunking further posts…

2

The Formal Goodness of Agile Software Architecture – Part 2

In Part 1 of this short series I discussed an article that proposes the Intensional/Locality Thesis for formally distinguishing between what is Architecture and what is Design. Part 1 also covered how the Thesis has shaped my thinking about the role of the Architect and Software Architecture within an Agile project team. As I was…

1

The Formal Goodness of Agile Software Architecture – Part 1

The purely addictive aspects of working at The Big Show for a geek like me cannot be underestimated. In many ways Microsoft is like any other Fortune 500 company I’ve worked or consulted for, but I’m often reminded that working for Microsoft is different – it’s pure crack for geeks. As an example, I recently…

1

Oslo “M” Graphs and Inheritance

In my last post I explored the subject of applying Object-Relational Mapping (ORM) concept to modeling in M. What I discovered was that M handles ORM pretty well and allows for the modeling of polymorphic inheritance within M metamodels – thereby enabling rich Object-Oriented runtimes to consume Oslo metamodels. At the end of the post…

1

Modeling Inheritance in Oslo’s “M”

As I recently posted, I’m very intrigued by the potential of the Oslo platform to democratize the use of metamodel-driven software architectures. As a first step in exploring the capabilities of the latest Oslo CTP I took some time over the weekend to dive into M – particularly modeling types using M (formerly known as…

5

Oslo Really is About Model-Driven Development

As I’ve wrote about previously, I’ve flipped the bit on Oslo and I’m currently very excited about the long term prospects for the technology. Like many have wrote about in the blogosphere, I was initially skeptical about Oslo. Seeing the demos for modeling in M types (formerly MSchema) and creating a SQL Server DB for…

7

Oslo May CTP Has Improved System.Identity!

The Oslo team released the May 2009 CTP yesterday. For those that are interested in Oslo in general, and System.Identity in particular, then effort to get the new CTP up and running is well worth it. From the perspective of System.Identity, the new Oslo CTP represents an important leap forward in terms of design and…

1

Implementing UML Associations and Oslo’s System.Identity

As I really don’t have much of a life I was reading an academic paper this evening by Anneke Kleppe. In the References section of the paper there were the a couple of links to some articles on properly implementing UML Associations in source code. The articles are fairly old now (they were written in…

1

Exploring the Party Model with Oslo’s System.Identity – Part 3

In Part 1 of this series we covered the basics of how Oslo’s System.Identity implements the Party Model and how System.Identity can be used to model real world scenarios. We continued our exploration of System.Identity in Part 2 by modeling more complex real world scenarios and illustrating how System.Identity can handle asymmetric relationships and transient…

2

Exploring the Party Model with Oslo’s System.Identity – Part 2

In Part 1 of this series we discussed the basics of the Party Model using Oslo’s System.Identity schema. Specifically, we discussed the System.Identity constructs for Party, Role (including the Employee and Customer specializations of Role), and TaxonomyEntry (to allow for assigning a “Kind” to Parties and Roles). We also put these System.Identity constructs to use…

4