
An Introduction to BON – Business Object Notation (1999) - Tomte
http://www.cs.yorku.ca/~paige/Bon/bon.html
======
jokerx
Looks just like UML to me.

All those "round trip" model to code, code to model promises were a bust. And
this article from the late 90s--talk about stale ideas.

~~~
Tomte
Contracts and assertions are definitely not "just like UML".

~~~
jokerx
Those have been in UML for years. (Google it.) Actually, that's the problem:
_everything_ is in UML. I am sure someone pointed out that "X" had it but UML
didn't, so they made sure to add it.

BTW, a 20 year old link is not going to present anyone with up to date tech
info. You have to make allowances for the progress of rival technology.

------
bovermyer
I see how this is simpler than UML, and ostensibly how it's useful for
planning systems. With a bit of cleverness, it could also be generated from
pre-existing code in certain languages.

Why have I not heard of this before?

~~~
Tomte
It also touts the ability to facilitate going backwards from code to model,
not just model to code. But I haven't ever read anything about how well it
works in practice.

There is also a book, "Seamless Object-Oriented Software Architecture", that
introduced the method and is supposed to be quite good.

