Pub Date : 1995-08-21DOI: 10.1109/SESS.1995.525950
D. Welzel, H. Hausen, W. Schmidt
Activities to be performed and documents to be produced or modified are the basic elements of a software process. They are grouped according to aspects of development, quality assurance, configuration management or project management. Activities might be refined or generalized. Each resulting process can be tested separately or in context with all of the other processes, whether it is enactable and whether standard conformity is given. A protocol of the tailoring and conformance testing process is recorded in order to fulfill quality management requirements. As a consequence, model consistency as well as standard conformance (e.g. to ISO9000-3) can be shown. The tailoring and consistency and conformance testing of software processes are supported by the tool ProcePT implemented in Prolog. The entire process of tailoring and conformance testing is recorded and therefore conforms to duality management standard requirements.
{"title":"Tailoring and conformance testing of software processes: the ProcePT approach","authors":"D. Welzel, H. Hausen, W. Schmidt","doi":"10.1109/SESS.1995.525950","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/SESS.1995.525950","url":null,"abstract":"Activities to be performed and documents to be produced or modified are the basic elements of a software process. They are grouped according to aspects of development, quality assurance, configuration management or project management. Activities might be refined or generalized. Each resulting process can be tested separately or in context with all of the other processes, whether it is enactable and whether standard conformity is given. A protocol of the tailoring and conformance testing process is recorded in order to fulfill quality management requirements. As a consequence, model consistency as well as standard conformance (e.g. to ISO9000-3) can be shown. The tailoring and consistency and conformance testing of software processes are supported by the tool ProcePT implemented in Prolog. The entire process of tailoring and conformance testing is recorded and therefore conforms to duality management standard requirements.","PeriodicalId":178570,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of Software Engineering Standards Symposium","volume":"750 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1995-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116124294","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1995-08-21DOI: 10.1109/SESS.1995.525948
D. Lange
Budget is one of the primary engineering constraints for United States Department of Defence (DOD) program managers. In order to satisfy expanding requirement sets with less development money, managers have consolidated projects eliminating systems that are designed for the requirements of a single site or class of sites. As the consolidation approach has risen in the hierarchy, the variety of software being brought together has grown and the amount of software reuse required has been amplified. As a result, a new method of system integration has become essential. The paper describes the integration standard and tool set being used by major elements of the DOD, including the Defence Information Systems Agency which is responsible for integrating the Global Command and Control System. By automating integration, the DOD has developed an efficient, repeatable process for integrating the work of many developers.
{"title":"Automated integration for the joint maritime command information system","authors":"D. Lange","doi":"10.1109/SESS.1995.525948","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/SESS.1995.525948","url":null,"abstract":"Budget is one of the primary engineering constraints for United States Department of Defence (DOD) program managers. In order to satisfy expanding requirement sets with less development money, managers have consolidated projects eliminating systems that are designed for the requirements of a single site or class of sites. As the consolidation approach has risen in the hierarchy, the variety of software being brought together has grown and the amount of software reuse required has been amplified. As a result, a new method of system integration has become essential. The paper describes the integration standard and tool set being used by major elements of the DOD, including the Defence Information Systems Agency which is responsible for integrating the Global Command and Control System. By automating integration, the DOD has developed an efficient, repeatable process for integrating the work of many developers.","PeriodicalId":178570,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of Software Engineering Standards Symposium","volume":"55 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1995-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129015708","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1995-08-21DOI: 10.1109/SESS.1995.525953
A.J. Chruscicki, J. Gaffney
The paper presents some definitions of quality and relates them to the efforts of the USAF Rome Laboratory Software Quality Technology Transfer Consortium (SQTTC) and the Rome Laboratory Software Quality Framework (RLSQF). The paper suggests that the RLSQF might be profitably modified to focus on the use of defect data obtained during the verification activities (inspections and tests) of the software development process.
{"title":"Toward a quality inspection method and management","authors":"A.J. Chruscicki, J. Gaffney","doi":"10.1109/SESS.1995.525953","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/SESS.1995.525953","url":null,"abstract":"The paper presents some definitions of quality and relates them to the efforts of the USAF Rome Laboratory Software Quality Technology Transfer Consortium (SQTTC) and the Rome Laboratory Software Quality Framework (RLSQF). The paper suggests that the RLSQF might be profitably modified to focus on the use of defect data obtained during the verification activities (inspections and tests) of the software development process.","PeriodicalId":178570,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of Software Engineering Standards Symposium","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1995-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129890437","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1995-08-21DOI: 10.1109/SESS.1995.525970
G. Knafl
The Software Reliability Engineering Tactical Planning Group (SRETPG) was first formed in the spring of 1994. I was appointed chair shortly afterward. There are currently about 75 members. About 80% of the members are from the US, while the remaining members are Tom 12 different countries. About 85% of the members are from industrial or government institutions while the remaining members are from academic institutions. All but a few members are in contact through electronic mail. Individuals interested in participating should contact the chair by electronic mail at “gknafl@condor.depaul.edu” in order to join the group. SRETPG members submitted statements, comments, and suggestions primarily by electronic but also by regular mail. These were used to compile the various versions of an action plan document which were then circulated to SRETPG members as a whole for review. SRETPG members are categorized as participants, reviewers, and interested others in apparent decreasing order of involvement. However, this only approximately reflects the relative contributions of individual members since individuals in each of the categories contributed substantially to sections of personal interest. All members reviewed the document as a whole, but members in contact by electronic mail had access to more drafts than those in contact by regular mail. Electronic mail is an effective means for compiling an initial version of such a plan. Most members have limited travel budgets, and so it was necessaq to limit the number of face-to-face meetings. Members sent comments either to the committee as a whole or directly to the chair. These comments were integrated by the chair into the action plan document. Periodically, versions of the document were circulated for review of recently added comments. Most comments are efficiently handled in this manner. However, some comments, for example, insightil or controversial comments, or comments by well-respected members, stimulate more discussion when
{"title":"Overview of SRE Standards Planning Activities","authors":"G. Knafl","doi":"10.1109/SESS.1995.525970","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/SESS.1995.525970","url":null,"abstract":"The Software Reliability Engineering Tactical Planning Group (SRETPG) was first formed in the spring of 1994. I was appointed chair shortly afterward. There are currently about 75 members. About 80% of the members are from the US, while the remaining members are Tom 12 different countries. About 85% of the members are from industrial or government institutions while the remaining members are from academic institutions. All but a few members are in contact through electronic mail. Individuals interested in participating should contact the chair by electronic mail at “gknafl@condor.depaul.edu” in order to join the group. SRETPG members submitted statements, comments, and suggestions primarily by electronic but also by regular mail. These were used to compile the various versions of an action plan document which were then circulated to SRETPG members as a whole for review. SRETPG members are categorized as participants, reviewers, and interested others in apparent decreasing order of involvement. However, this only approximately reflects the relative contributions of individual members since individuals in each of the categories contributed substantially to sections of personal interest. All members reviewed the document as a whole, but members in contact by electronic mail had access to more drafts than those in contact by regular mail. Electronic mail is an effective means for compiling an initial version of such a plan. Most members have limited travel budgets, and so it was necessaq to limit the number of face-to-face meetings. Members sent comments either to the committee as a whole or directly to the chair. These comments were integrated by the chair into the action plan document. Periodically, versions of the document were circulated for review of recently added comments. Most comments are efficiently handled in this manner. However, some comments, for example, insightil or controversial comments, or comments by well-respected members, stimulate more discussion when","PeriodicalId":178570,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of Software Engineering Standards Symposium","volume":"6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1995-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127922800","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1995-08-21DOI: 10.1109/SESS.1995.525965
T. Tran, J. Sherif
This paper proposes Quality Function Deployment (QFD) as an effective tool for the capture and refinement of requirements. When applied to a project, QFD will enable its success. More specifically, QFD will: (1) improve product quality by focusing on customer requirements up-front and throughout the development cycle; (2) improve communications between customers, system engineers, programmers and testers and thus contribute to a better decision-making process; (3) facilitate the management of change, through rigorous rating and systematic traceability of requirements; (4) reduce costs of projects, by enabling concurrent engineering and by reducing costs associated with late-in-the life-cycle rework, (5) enable alignment between customer requirements, product requirements, and cost requirements (or constraints), and (6) enable cataloguing of key performance requirements, for parameter-based modeling of the target application and systematic reuse of requirements across projects.
{"title":"Quality Function Deployment (QFD): an effective technique for requirements acquisition and reuse","authors":"T. Tran, J. Sherif","doi":"10.1109/SESS.1995.525965","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/SESS.1995.525965","url":null,"abstract":"This paper proposes Quality Function Deployment (QFD) as an effective tool for the capture and refinement of requirements. When applied to a project, QFD will enable its success. More specifically, QFD will: (1) improve product quality by focusing on customer requirements up-front and throughout the development cycle; (2) improve communications between customers, system engineers, programmers and testers and thus contribute to a better decision-making process; (3) facilitate the management of change, through rigorous rating and systematic traceability of requirements; (4) reduce costs of projects, by enabling concurrent engineering and by reducing costs associated with late-in-the life-cycle rework, (5) enable alignment between customer requirements, product requirements, and cost requirements (or constraints), and (6) enable cataloguing of key performance requirements, for parameter-based modeling of the target application and systematic reuse of requirements across projects.","PeriodicalId":178570,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of Software Engineering Standards Symposium","volume":"108 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1995-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114529230","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1995-08-21DOI: 10.1109/SESS.1995.525956
L. Tripp, P. Voldner
The development and maintenance of quality software involves the effective use of software engineering standards. The development of national and international software engineering standards began in the early 1970s. Since that time more than 300 standards have been developed. From a user's perspective, there is duplication, inconsistencies, overlap and omissions. In the 1980s the two major international standards organizations formed a joint technical committee on information technology to deal with a range of standards including those for software. A market-driven architecture for software engineering standards has been developed to: guide the development and organization of international software engineering standards; position those standards in relation to standards for quality systems (ISO 9000 series) and system-related standards dependability (IEC TC56), safety-critical (IEC SC65A), and security (ISO/IEC JTC1/SC27); and promote the adoption of software engineering standards in the marketplace.
{"title":"A market-driven architecture for software engineering standards","authors":"L. Tripp, P. Voldner","doi":"10.1109/SESS.1995.525956","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/SESS.1995.525956","url":null,"abstract":"The development and maintenance of quality software involves the effective use of software engineering standards. The development of national and international software engineering standards began in the early 1970s. Since that time more than 300 standards have been developed. From a user's perspective, there is duplication, inconsistencies, overlap and omissions. In the 1980s the two major international standards organizations formed a joint technical committee on information technology to deal with a range of standards including those for software. A market-driven architecture for software engineering standards has been developed to: guide the development and organization of international software engineering standards; position those standards in relation to standards for quality systems (ISO 9000 series) and system-related standards dependability (IEC TC56), safety-critical (IEC SC65A), and security (ISO/IEC JTC1/SC27); and promote the adoption of software engineering standards in the marketplace.","PeriodicalId":178570,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of Software Engineering Standards Symposium","volume":"12 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1995-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122155458","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1995-08-21DOI: 10.1109/SESS.1995.525955
D. Kiang
The requirements and the need for harmonization of International Standards of ISO/IEC JTCI/SC7/WG9 on Software Integrity and IEC/TC56/WG10 on Software Aspects of Dependability are discussed. A collaborative framework for the joint Working Group (WG) of the respective ISO/IEC Technical Committees (TC) for software standards development is presented. The harmonization process provides a unique cross disciplinary action in the collaboration by addressing integrity level as a unifying concept and dependability as a specific risk dimension in system application where software components are involved. The experience and cooperative spirit of the joint WG are captured to serve as a model for other standards development needing to extend beyond their own technical boundaries for the benefits of the ultimate users of the standards.
{"title":"Harmonization of international software standards on integrity and dependability","authors":"D. Kiang","doi":"10.1109/SESS.1995.525955","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/SESS.1995.525955","url":null,"abstract":"The requirements and the need for harmonization of International Standards of ISO/IEC JTCI/SC7/WG9 on Software Integrity and IEC/TC56/WG10 on Software Aspects of Dependability are discussed. A collaborative framework for the joint Working Group (WG) of the respective ISO/IEC Technical Committees (TC) for software standards development is presented. The harmonization process provides a unique cross disciplinary action in the collaboration by addressing integrity level as a unifying concept and dependability as a specific risk dimension in system application where software components are involved. The experience and cooperative spirit of the joint WG are captured to serve as a model for other standards development needing to extend beyond their own technical boundaries for the benefits of the ultimate users of the standards.","PeriodicalId":178570,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of Software Engineering Standards Symposium","volume":"48 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1995-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124142612","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1995-08-21DOI: 10.1109/SESS.1995.525949
R. Milovanovic, S. Stockman, M. Norris
The paper describes the successful use of DOD-STD-2167A elements, adapted for industrial use, in the training of the best software designers in a leading telecommunications company. The standards were used as the bridge between different technical cultures of different groups of designers, and provided significant return on investment. The adaptation started by recognizing that a commercial organization in general offers a multitude of products and services to the market, that they all belong to one or more domains, and that they (can) correspond to software configuration items. The Top Gun Design College was built by providing appropriate requirements specifications for college case studies. Each specification has a domain model, service specification, system specification, specifications of interfaces, and specifications of (software and other) configuration items. Case studies corresponded to real life projects. Both the real life projects and college exercises involved a multitude of methods and paradigms.
{"title":"Standards foundation for the Top Gun Design College","authors":"R. Milovanovic, S. Stockman, M. Norris","doi":"10.1109/SESS.1995.525949","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/SESS.1995.525949","url":null,"abstract":"The paper describes the successful use of DOD-STD-2167A elements, adapted for industrial use, in the training of the best software designers in a leading telecommunications company. The standards were used as the bridge between different technical cultures of different groups of designers, and provided significant return on investment. The adaptation started by recognizing that a commercial organization in general offers a multitude of products and services to the market, that they all belong to one or more domains, and that they (can) correspond to software configuration items. The Top Gun Design College was built by providing appropriate requirements specifications for college case studies. Each specification has a domain model, service specification, system specification, specifications of interfaces, and specifications of (software and other) configuration items. Case studies corresponded to real life projects. Both the real life projects and college exercises involved a multitude of methods and paradigms.","PeriodicalId":178570,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of Software Engineering Standards Symposium","volume":"38 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1995-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131675180","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1995-08-21DOI: 10.1109/SESS.1995.525964
A.N. Tsukumo, C. Capovilla, C. M. Rêgo, M. Jino, J. Maldonado
An evaluation experiment for software products, based on ISO/IEC 9126 Standard and from the user point of view is reported. A black box evaluation process based on checklists was performed. The experiment was done in the context of the awarding procedure for the ASSESPRO Prize "Best Software of the Year" for 1993, aimed at the Brazilian Software Industry. Lessons learned from qualitative observations of the evaluation process rather than quantitative results are the most important contribution of this paper. Recommendations on the elaboration of checklists and their application, already adopted for the awarding procedure of the ASSESPRO Prize for 1994, are presented.
{"title":"ISO/IEC 9126: an experiment of application on Brazilian software products","authors":"A.N. Tsukumo, C. Capovilla, C. M. Rêgo, M. Jino, J. Maldonado","doi":"10.1109/SESS.1995.525964","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/SESS.1995.525964","url":null,"abstract":"An evaluation experiment for software products, based on ISO/IEC 9126 Standard and from the user point of view is reported. A black box evaluation process based on checklists was performed. The experiment was done in the context of the awarding procedure for the ASSESPRO Prize \"Best Software of the Year\" for 1993, aimed at the Brazilian Software Industry. Lessons learned from qualitative observations of the evaluation process rather than quantitative results are the most important contribution of this paper. Recommendations on the elaboration of checklists and their application, already adopted for the awarding procedure of the ASSESPRO Prize for 1994, are presented.","PeriodicalId":178570,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of Software Engineering Standards Symposium","volume":"37 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1995-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122875936","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1995-08-21DOI: 10.1109/SESS.1995.525963
A. April, F. Coallier
Since 1982 Bell Canada has been developing a model to assess the software development process of existing and prospective suppliers as a means to minimize the risks involved and ensure both the performance and timely delivery of software systems purchased. This paper presents the revised Trillium model (version 3.0). The basis of the process assessment models for software relies on benchmarking, e.g. comparing your practices with the best and successful organizations. It is also a basic tool that you will find in the TQM literature. For software assessment we have used initially two levels of benchmarks to develop the model: professional, national and international standards; and comparisons with other organizations in the same market segment. The software assessment model should therefore map to existing engineering standards as well as quality standards. It should also provide an output that can be used easily to benchmark against "best-in-class" organizations.
{"title":"Trillium: a model for the assessment of telecom software system development and maintenance capability","authors":"A. April, F. Coallier","doi":"10.1109/SESS.1995.525963","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/SESS.1995.525963","url":null,"abstract":"Since 1982 Bell Canada has been developing a model to assess the software development process of existing and prospective suppliers as a means to minimize the risks involved and ensure both the performance and timely delivery of software systems purchased. This paper presents the revised Trillium model (version 3.0). The basis of the process assessment models for software relies on benchmarking, e.g. comparing your practices with the best and successful organizations. It is also a basic tool that you will find in the TQM literature. For software assessment we have used initially two levels of benchmarks to develop the model: professional, national and international standards; and comparisons with other organizations in the same market segment. The software assessment model should therefore map to existing engineering standards as well as quality standards. It should also provide an output that can be used easily to benchmark against \"best-in-class\" organizations.","PeriodicalId":178570,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of Software Engineering Standards Symposium","volume":"24 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1995-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121434598","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：