Tool Integration beyond Wasserman

Asplund, Fredrik; Biehl, Matthias; El‐khoury, Jad; Törngren, Martin

doi:10.1007/978-3-642-22056-2_29

Cited by 8 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some sources add to the denition by including user interface sophistication Stavridou, 1999) or interaction paradigms . Others entirely reject the view that the goal of presentation integration is always to produce a uniform user interface (Wong, 1999;Tilley, 2000;Asplund et al, 2011). These instead argue that the focus should be changed to the integration of the dierent users to the tools via their user interfaces.…”

Section: Presentation Integrationmentioning

confidence: 99%

The discourse on tool integration beyond technology, a literature survey

Asplund

Törngren

2015

Journal of Systems and Software

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The tool integration research area emerged in the 1980s. This survey focuses on those strands of tool integration research that discuss issues beyond technology.We reveal a discourse centered around six frequently mentioned non-functional properties. These properties have been discussed in relation to technology and high level issues. However, while technical details have been covered, high level issues and, by extension, the contexts in which tool integration can be found, are treated indierently. We conclude that this indierence needs to be challenged, and research on a larger set of stakeholders and contexts initiated.An inventory of the use of classication schemes underlines the diculty of evolving the classical classication scheme published by Wasserman. Two frequently mentioned redenitions are highlighted to facilitate their wider use.A closer look at the limited number of research methods and the poor attention to research design indicates a need for a changed set of research methods.We propose more critical case studies and method diversication through theory triangulation.Additionally, among disparate discourses we highlight several focusing on standardization which are likely to contain relevant ndings. This suggests that open communities employed in the context of (pre-)standardization could be especially important in furthering the targeted discourse.

show abstract

Section: Presentation Integrationmentioning

confidence: 99%

The discourse on tool integration beyond technology, a literature survey

Asplund

Törngren

2015

Journal of Systems and Software

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Dealing with MVM is complex, with (i) multiple types of contextual settings in terms of processes and legacy, (ii) multiple heterogeneous viewpoints and views , (iii) multiple types of relations among views, and (iv) multiple ways of dealing with such relations. Supporting them in a multi-tool environment will require addressing all classical tool integration aspects [61,8,17]. Derived challenges for MVM include that of designing such systems, dealing with legacy systems, and in supporting automation for such systems, while ensuring that the above mentioned challenges are properly handled.…”

Section: Challenges Of MV Modelingmentioning

confidence: 99%

A characterization of integrated multi-view modeling in the context of embedded and cyber-physical systems

Persson¹,

Törngren²,

Qamar³

et al. 2013

2013 Proceedings of the International Conference on Embedded Software (EMSOFT)

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Embedded systems, with their tight technology integration, and multiple requirements and stakeholders, are characterized by tightly interrelated processes, information and tools. Embedded systems will as a consequence be described by multiple, heterogeneous and interrelated descriptions such as for example requirements documents, design and analysis models, software and hardware descriptions. We refer to a system designed this way as a multi-view (MV) system.The main contribution of this paper is a characterization of model-based approaches to MV systems. The characterization takes three main perspectives for the relations between viewpoints: semantic relations (content), relations over time (process), and manipulation of views (operations). We complement these perspectives by investigating MV system challenges and by a survey of related approaches. The characterization aims to provide a basis for a better understanding, design and implementation of MV systems, and thereby to overcome the current fragmented points of view on integrated multi-view modeling (MVM).

show abstract

“…STPA defines generic risks for inadequate control or enforcement of safety constraints that can lead to hazards. We first translated these generic risks into risks associated with tool integration by use of a reference model for tool integration that takes tool integration related to platform, control, data, presentation and process into account (the details of this reference model are given in [16]). The risks associated with these aspects of tool integration were then further translated into programmatic risks (i.e.…”

Section: From Characteristics To Safety Goalsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…They both allow (1) a stronger focus on the relevant parts of tool chains in regard to safety and (2) ) and extra efforts to ensure safety goals relevant to tool integration. They also have the additional benefits of allowing comparisons between different setups for mitigating safety issues already after step 2 (giving an early indication of the effort required) and favoring early planning in regard to the development environment (helping to avoid fragmentation of the development environment into several islands of automation [16]). …”

Section: Fully Composable Safety Goals For Operator Supportmentioning

confidence: 99%

Qualifying Software Tools, a Systems Approach

Asplund

El‐khoury

Törngren

2012

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Modern safety standards designed to ensure safety in embedded system products often take a descriptive approach, focusing on describing appropriate requirements on management, processes, methods and environments during development. While the qualification of software tools has been included in several such standards, how to handle the safety implications of tools integrated into tool chains has been largely ignored. This problem is aggravated by an increase both in automation of tool integration and the size of development environments.In this paper we define nine safety goals for tool chains and suggest a qualification method that takes a systems approach on certifying software tools as parts of tool chains. With this method, software tools are developed and pre-qualified under the assumption that certain properties will be supported by the development environment they are to be deployed in. The proposed method is intended to (1) achieve a stronger focus on the relevant parts of tool chains in regard to safety and (2) separate the extra effort these parts imply from the effort already stipulated by safety standards.

show abstract

Tool Integration beyond Wasserman

Cited by 8 publications

References 14 publications

The discourse on tool integration beyond technology, a literature survey

The discourse on tool integration beyond technology, a literature survey

A characterization of integrated multi-view modeling in the context of embedded and cyber-physical systems

Qualifying Software Tools, a Systems Approach

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About