We seem to agree with Microsoft!

Jack Greenfield blogs about UML and Model Driven Development (MDD), making the comment that "it is being promoted by a standards organization (i.e., the Object Management Group), not only as A medium, but as THE (official, sanctioned, approved, acceptable and appropriate) medium."

Which is a concern to me, since OMG seems desparate to capitalise on the UML brand, without much concern for the obvious unsuitability of UML (even the all-singing, all-dancing UML-2) for modelling in certain domains. This is the main point of Jack's post

Obviously we (DSTC and other "EDOCers") believe that for application-server based MDD, the most appropriate language for the job is "EDOC", or more specifically, the Enterprise Collaboration Architecture (ECA) part of the EDOC suite of specs. It was designed from the ground up by abstracting the concepts evident in most popular kinds of middleware of the early 2000s (most of which are still the most common platforms now - i.e. J2EE, MOM and workflow, and their now-almost-stable Web Services equivalents). For other traget platforms we wear of MOF hat, and say make your own language. We seem to agree with (gasp) Microsoft on this one.

Perhaps its time is yet to come (and the evidence is that despite a lack of coordinated marketing, the ECA is popping up in more and more places). So perhaps OMG will recognise this brand, and allow it some small airtime next to it's big brother, UML.