I am wondering: 

Is it possible to use meta edit as "round trip" tool, where a graph can also be generated by a client and visualized within Meta Edit. 

One could even envision a capability where a client internally augments a model and contributes the augmentations back to a model in meta edit. 

can this be done?

thank you,

Daniel

You can create graphs for import into MetaEdit+ as http://www.metacase.com/support/55/manuals/mwb/Mw-8.html" rel="nofollow - MXM files, or create or update any data with the http://www.metacase.com/support/55/manuals/mwb/Mw-9.html" rel="nofollow - API . (To import MXM, press the Import button, or automate it with http://www.metacase.com/support/55/manuals/mwb/Mw-10_1.html" rel="nofollow - fileInPatch: on the command line, in MERL's http://www.metacase.com/support/55/manuals/mwb/Mw-6_4_8.html" rel="nofollow - internal..execute , or http://www.metacase.com/support/55/manuals/mwb/Mw-9_4_6.html" rel="nofollow - called via the API.) But remember that the main point of MetaEdit+, as the name suggests, is that it is for editing. In particular, with a domain-specific modeling language, it can offer the best possible environment and minimum possible amount of work needed to specify a system. 

"Round trip" is something that never really works. You can automate a transformation from a high level of abstraction to a lower one, but not the reverse. It can thus only work if the two formats are at the same level of abstraction, in which case there's little gain. If both formats are live in the same tool, you can get some net benefit, e.g. from looking at the same model as a diagram or a matrix, as MetaEdit+ offers. But if they are in different tools, the benefits are outweighed by the extra work necessary to build, maintain and learn both tools, and to cope with the inevitable slight lossiness or corner cases of even the best attempts at round-trip transformation.