Hi,
Depends on what you mean with "Papyrus-RT-based DSL", and how much tooling/customization that you expect to be built/implemented on top of Papyrus-RT for it to be called a DSL. Do you count the use of MMA from MMA, as a "Papyrus-RT-based DSL"?
I we take the systems modeling perspective, I would expect that there will be a need for the "RT interaction profile" (or whatever we will call that), on top of what we have planned so far. Not sure either if that counts as a "Papyrus-RT-based DSL", since it just handling the aspects of using UML-RT in the context of interactions/sequence diagrams. This I just see as a structuring of the UML-RT profile into separate parts (similar to how the state-machine aspect is kept in a separate profile, from the core structuring aspects in the core UML-RT profile).
Additional "DSL aspects" I could very well see that you can handle with 3PP tools like MMA from Adocus, and then you don't need any additional tooling implemented (since MMA handles that completely dynamically based on the meta-model iin form of an ordinary class model that you feed it). Or that you just combine the use of plain UML, e.g adding use case diagrams and activity diagrams into the mix of using structure modeling from UML-RT.
So, yes, I could expect people wanting to use the structural part of Papyrus-RT, without necessary go as far as they create a "Papyrus-RT-based DSL" (if we exclude the use of MMA).
/Peter Cigéhn