Process semantics for UML component specifications to assess inheritance

Roubtsova, Ella; Kuiper, Ruurd

doi:10.1016/s1571-0661(04)80618-2

Cited by 7 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…AC · DB in such a way that, if the features in sequences are the same from the root, then they are merged. The algorithms of such merging is described in (Roubtsova and Kuiper, 2002). …”

Section: Feature Computation Trees For the Systems Producing Anonymoumentioning

confidence: 99%

A Feature Computation Tree Model to Specify Requirements and Reuse

Roubtsova¹,

Roubtsov

2006

Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:A large subset of requirements for complex systems, services and product lines is traditionally specified by hierarchical structures of features. Features are usually gathered and represented in the form of a feature tree. The feature tree is a structural model. It represents mainly composition and specialization relations between features and does not provide the possibility to specify requirements in the form of ordering relations defined on functional features. Use case scenarios are usually employed for specification of the ordering relations. However, use case scenarios comprise isolated sequences of features, and therefore they may be inconsistent and even may contradict each other and the feature tree. Moreover, some use case scenarios defining relations on features may be incomplete. In order to support consistent specification of requirements, we suggest using a pair of related models: a feature tree model and a feature computation tree model. The pair of such related feature tree models provides the basis for the method of consistency checks of requirements. It introduces a united view on the system's behavior at the stage of requirement specification and facilitates specification of forbidden sequences and construction complete sequences from incomplete ones. It allows designers to precisely specify the desired reuse and to find that a certain sort of reuse is not possible. Understanding already at the stage of requirements engineering that a subsystem cannot be reused without modification saves effort and money spent on development. The proposed method and models are explained using a case study of design of a system for electronic cards production.

show abstract

“…AC · DB in such a way that, if the features in sequences are the same from the root, then they are merged. The algorithms of such merging is described in (Roubtsova and Kuiper, 2002). …”

Section: Feature Computation Trees For the Systems Producing Anonymoumentioning

confidence: 99%

A Feature Computation Tree Model to Specify Requirements and Reuse

Roubtsova¹,

Roubtsov

2006

Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The process term of a component is specified by a designer in the UML component profile by an interface-role diagram (a variant of the class diagram [2,5]) and a set of sequence diagrams. For example, the UML diagrams of component Graph Designer is shown in Fig.1a,c.…”

Section: The Component Model Used By the Toolmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, the UML diagrams of component Graph Designer is shown in Fig.1a,c. Using all of these diagrams our tool constructs the process term (Fig.1d) [5]. The set of action names of the process term is derived from the UML interface-role diagram (Fig.1b).…”

Section: The Component Model Used By the Toolmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thus, the specification of a component in our tool [5] contains three consistent parts: an interface-role diagram, a set of sequence diagrams and a process term.…”

Section: The Component Model Used By the Toolmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In this paper, we present a Rational Rose Add-In which supports the consistent design of components and the specification reuse in a UML profile [5]. The design is driven by an internal process model built into the tool.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations