The FieSta Framework: Fine-grained Derivation and Configuration - Model-Driven and Software Product Line Engineering - page 147

Thus, in a constraint C =[M,F A, D] , C conforms
either to GroupConstraint or Constraint , M conforms
to MetaConcept ; F conforms to either Grouped or
CointainableByF ( Group or Solitary ), i and j (from
A =[i, j] ) conforms to fineMin and fineMax , and D conforms
to OCLExpression .

5.2.5.2. The binding metamodel
To introduce the concept of binding, we create a binding
metamodel ,Figure 5.4.This metamodel extends our constraint
metamodel with concepts for binding model elements
to features. Thus, a set of Configurations associated
with a RootFeature can be created. A Configuration
groups a set of bindings between Features and model
elements. We maintain the information of model elements as
properties of the Binding metaconcept, metaconceptName ,
and elementName .

Figure 5.4. Binding metamodel

5.2.6. Validating binding models against constraint

models

We say a binding B = E,F 1 ] satisfies a constraint
C =[M, F 2 ,A,D] when E conforms to M , F 1 = F 2 , and B
satisfies the restrictions defined by the properties A and D .
We note this relationship B

s
→ C . For example, binding3
from Figure 5.1 satisfies the constraint1 from Figure 5.2
because mainRoomW2 conforms to Window and B satisfies