On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 18:34:51 +0900, Phil Tomson <ptkwt / aracnet.com> wrote:
[...]
> "[...]This is a far different approach than UML's
> general, wide-purpose models. For example, UML class diagrams
> can be used for conceptual modeling, object-oriented analysis
> modeling, object-oriented design modeling, logical data modeling and
> physical data modeling.[...]"

FWIW, the author of that statement is wrong. UML cannot be effectively
used for either logical or physical data modeling. It's too based in
object modeling. People who use UML for ER/data modeling are making a
huge mistake. There's far better modeling methodologies out there than
UML.

Other than that, I agree -- the move toward DSLs is encouraging. The
one thing that would be useful with DSLs is encouraging people to
share their DSL specifications and implementations so that people can
work from similar concepts. This won't necessarily lead to a "unified"
DSL (which is undesirable) but it will reduce the likelihood of
duplicate work that is just slightly mismatched.

-a
-- 
Austin Ziegler * halostatue / gmail.com
               * Alternate: austin / halostatue.ca