Dr Ben, Cuchulain, I think you're mistaken. The OMG have a track record of producing overcomplex, bureacratic, ugly standards that promise the world and ultimately disappoint. If you think about Corba, UML, XMI, MOF they all share two things:1) They are fat and ugly.2) They are products of the OMG.If you look at the standards that have appeared over the past ten or twenty years you will see two distinct camps: 1) Standards that were "harvested" from existing innovative technology, typically developed by a couple of people. 2) Standards that were created as a foundation by a larger group (committee) that identified a hole, created a standard with a reference implementation following shortly afterwardsIn the Java world that I know, examples of the first type are the JDBC standard, the Servlet api, and the JDom standards which standardized the Weblogic Tengah database driver and the Sun Java Web Server, and JDom. Examples of the second are the EJB, the JMX standard and the JAXB standard.Any of the first three specs can be read and comprehended in one sitting. Their implementations solve a very specific problem quite neatly. The second three are butt ugly, difficult to comprehend and imperfectly solve overgeneralized problems. I'd argue that the EJB standard in particular has been responsible for more project fail;ures than any other in the history of software development. Whilst I can't see executable UML matching EJBs record I am extremely skeptical about its utility. Ultimately the end point of development is code. Visual pportayals of code are extremely useful and are certainly underutilized. The best bang for buck here is often imperfect scrawls on a napkin whiteboard or back of an envelope that show ambiguous bozxes and lines and have a shelf life of about three minutes in a technical discussion. The step up from this of using UML to diagram one p[art of an existing system, perhaps to justify to management whny something took N months can be useful. But of course the challenge here that cannot be automated is what to leave on the diagram and what to omit. It's a little like when Rodin was asked "How do you sculpt?" and replied "Simple. I choose a block of marble and chop off whatever I don't need." Thjere are different personality types who choose programming as a profession. One type who are often pretty good are what I think of as the "black and whiters" who see programming as a refuge from the muddy inconsistent world of people and like the reassuring certainty of syntax. For them MDA plays into their desire for unambigous requirements but, as this view of technology is incomplete, it will never be the silver bullet they are hoping for. Ultimately programming is an antisocial social activity. When we write code we're beginning a conversation with the next N programmers and we forget this at our peril. Imagine inheriting a system that is written in executable UML. Yes in theory UML can completely depict a system - and in theory men could carry children in their abdomens but I'd happily bet $10k that men won't be queueing up to do this in my lifetime. MDA would eb useful if the world were describale by UML. It isn't.Stroustrup started work on "C with Classes" in 1979 and Gosling began work on "Oak" 12 years later in 1991. I think Java has really just become useful now. I think the next wave will be higher level languages that use dynamic typing and are less verbose than Java and less arcane than C++. I think the obvious candidates for language of the next decade are Python, Groovy and Ruby - all ric h typed OO languages with some functional characteristgics and good sized class libraries. The minor technicaL advantages that C# has over Java seem outweighed by the lack of third party libraries or choice of developer tools. I expect that C# GUIs will be fashionable for some enterprises but eventually rich clients will eb written in a more concise scripting language. I also think that developer tools will become more important as we need to leverage larger and larger code bases. I do not expect to see fruit baskets returning to the workplace in the next ten years.Enough ranting.