Pub Date : 2007-05-20DOI: 10.1109/SHARK-ADI.2007.7
A. Mattsson, B. Lundell, B. Lings, Brian Fitzgerald
A basic idea of model driven development (MDD) is to capture all important design information in a set of formal or semi formal models that are automatically kept consistent by tools. This paper reports on industrial experience from use of MDD and shows that the approach needs improvements regarding the architecture since there are no suggested ways to formalize design rules which are an important part of the architecture. Instead, one has to rely on time consuming and error prone manual interpretations, reviews and reworkings to keep the system consistent with the architecture. To reap the full benefits of MDD it is therefore important to find ways of formalizing design rules to make it possible to allow automatic enforcement of the architecture on the system model.
{"title":"Experiences from Representing Software Architecture in a Large Industrial Project Using Model Driven Development","authors":"A. Mattsson, B. Lundell, B. Lings, Brian Fitzgerald","doi":"10.1109/SHARK-ADI.2007.7","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/SHARK-ADI.2007.7","url":null,"abstract":"A basic idea of model driven development (MDD) is to capture all important design information in a set of formal or semi formal models that are automatically kept consistent by tools. This paper reports on industrial experience from use of MDD and shows that the approach needs improvements regarding the architecture since there are no suggested ways to formalize design rules which are an important part of the architecture. Instead, one has to rely on time consuming and error prone manual interpretations, reviews and reworkings to keep the system consistent with the architecture. To reap the full benefits of MDD it is therefore important to find ways of formalizing design rules to make it possible to allow automatic enforcement of the architecture on the system model.","PeriodicalId":393813,"journal":{"name":"Second Workshop on Sharing and Reusing Architectural Knowledge - Architecture, Rationale, and Design Intent (SHARK/ADI'07: ICSE Workshops 2007)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2007-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"117309254","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 : 2007-05-20DOI: 10.1109/SHARK-ADI.2007.8
Salvador Trujillo, Maider Azanza, O. Díaz, Rafael Capilla
Software architectures represent the design of a system for describing its main relevant parts. Recently, recording and documenting architectural design decisions has attracted the attention of the software architecture community. Design decisions are an important piece during the architecting process that must be explicitly documented, but there is little evidence of successful reuse of this architectural knowledge. This work focuses on the reuse of design decisions in order to customize architectures. Specifically, we explore extensibility ideas from software product lines to show how architectures can be extended on the basis of design decisions. The documentation of synthesis architectures has received so far little attention, and particularly its reuse. This ongoing research describes an approach for product line synthesis architecture, where design decisions are introduced to promote its reuse.
{"title":"Exploring Extensibility of Architectural Design Decisions","authors":"Salvador Trujillo, Maider Azanza, O. Díaz, Rafael Capilla","doi":"10.1109/SHARK-ADI.2007.8","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/SHARK-ADI.2007.8","url":null,"abstract":"Software architectures represent the design of a system for describing its main relevant parts. Recently, recording and documenting architectural design decisions has attracted the attention of the software architecture community. Design decisions are an important piece during the architecting process that must be explicitly documented, but there is little evidence of successful reuse of this architectural knowledge. This work focuses on the reuse of design decisions in order to customize architectures. Specifically, we explore extensibility ideas from software product lines to show how architectures can be extended on the basis of design decisions. The documentation of synthesis architectures has received so far little attention, and particularly its reuse. This ongoing research describes an approach for product line synthesis architecture, where design decisions are introduced to promote its reuse.","PeriodicalId":393813,"journal":{"name":"Second Workshop on Sharing and Reusing Architectural Knowledge - Architecture, Rationale, and Design Intent (SHARK/ADI'07: ICSE Workshops 2007)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2007-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125503623","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 : 2007-05-20DOI: 10.1109/SHARK-ADI.2007.5
Babu T. Lenin Lenin, M. Ramaiah, T. Prabhakar, D. Rambabu
Knowledge management of any domain requires controlled vocabularies, taxonomies, thesauri, ontologies, concept maps and other such artifacts. This paper describes an effort to identify the major concepts in software architecture that can go into such meta knowledge. The concept terms are identified through two different techniques (1) manually, through back-of-the-book index of some of the major texts in Software Architecture (2) through a semi-automatic technique by parsing the Wikipedia pages. Only generic architecture knowledge is considered. Apart from identifying the important concepts of software architecture, we could also see gaps in the software architecture content in the Wikipedia.
{"title":"ArchVoc--Towards an Ontology for Software Architecture","authors":"Babu T. Lenin Lenin, M. Ramaiah, T. Prabhakar, D. Rambabu","doi":"10.1109/SHARK-ADI.2007.5","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/SHARK-ADI.2007.5","url":null,"abstract":"Knowledge management of any domain requires controlled vocabularies, taxonomies, thesauri, ontologies, concept maps and other such artifacts. This paper describes an effort to identify the major concepts in software architecture that can go into such meta knowledge. The concept terms are identified through two different techniques (1) manually, through back-of-the-book index of some of the major texts in Software Architecture (2) through a semi-automatic technique by parsing the Wikipedia pages. Only generic architecture knowledge is considered. Apart from identifying the important concepts of software architecture, we could also see gaps in the software architecture content in the Wikipedia.","PeriodicalId":393813,"journal":{"name":"Second Workshop on Sharing and Reusing Architectural Knowledge - Architecture, Rationale, and Design Intent (SHARK/ADI'07: ICSE Workshops 2007)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2007-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134045688","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 : 2007-05-20DOI: 10.1109/SHARK-ADI.2007.14
Liming Zhu, I. Gorton
A software architecture is composed of a collection of design decisions. Each design decision helps or hinders certain Non-Functional Requirements (NFR). Current software architecture views focus on expressing components and connectors in the system. Design decisions and their relationships with non-functional requirements are often captured in separate design documentation, not explicitly expressed in any views. This disassociation makes architecture comprehension and architecture evolution harder. In this paper, we propose a UML profile for modeling design decisions and an associated UML profile for modeling non-functional requirements in a generic way. The two UML profiles treat design decisions and nonfunctional requirements as first-class elements. Modeled design decisions always refer to existing architectural elements and thus maintain traceability between the two. We provide a mechanism for checking consistency over this traceability. An exemplar is given as a way to demonstrate the feasibility of our approach.
{"title":"UML Profiles for Design Decisions and Non-Functional Requirements","authors":"Liming Zhu, I. Gorton","doi":"10.1109/SHARK-ADI.2007.14","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/SHARK-ADI.2007.14","url":null,"abstract":"A software architecture is composed of a collection of design decisions. Each design decision helps or hinders certain Non-Functional Requirements (NFR). Current software architecture views focus on expressing components and connectors in the system. Design decisions and their relationships with non-functional requirements are often captured in separate design documentation, not explicitly expressed in any views. This disassociation makes architecture comprehension and architecture evolution harder. In this paper, we propose a UML profile for modeling design decisions and an associated UML profile for modeling non-functional requirements in a generic way. The two UML profiles treat design decisions and nonfunctional requirements as first-class elements. Modeled design decisions always refer to existing architectural elements and thus maintain traceability between the two. We provide a mechanism for checking consistency over this traceability. An exemplar is given as a way to demonstrate the feasibility of our approach.","PeriodicalId":393813,"journal":{"name":"Second Workshop on Sharing and Reusing Architectural Knowledge - Architecture, Rationale, and Design Intent (SHARK/ADI'07: ICSE Workshops 2007)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2007-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116064656","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 : 2007-05-20DOI: 10.1109/SHARK-ADI.2007.1
M. Babar, I. Gorton
This paper describes a tool for managing architectural knowledge and rationale. The tool has been developed to support a framework for capturing and using architectural knowledge to improve the architecture process. This paper describes the main architectural components and features of the tool. The paper also provides examples of using the tool for supporting well-known architecture design and analysis methods.
{"title":"A Tool for Managing Software Architecture Knowledge","authors":"M. Babar, I. Gorton","doi":"10.1109/SHARK-ADI.2007.1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/SHARK-ADI.2007.1","url":null,"abstract":"This paper describes a tool for managing architectural knowledge and rationale. The tool has been developed to support a framework for capturing and using architectural knowledge to improve the architecture process. This paper describes the main architectural components and features of the tool. The paper also provides examples of using the tool for supporting well-known architecture design and analysis methods.","PeriodicalId":393813,"journal":{"name":"Second Workshop on Sharing and Reusing Architectural Knowledge - Architecture, Rationale, and Design Intent (SHARK/ADI'07: ICSE Workshops 2007)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2007-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123350358","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 : 2007-05-20DOI: 10.1109/SHARK-ADI.2007.6
I. Habli, T. Kelly
The architecture definition activity of complex systems is intellectually intensive consuming much of the design time and budget. Rather than being regarded merely as a collection of views, software architecture can also be regarded as a collection of design decisions, such as tactics and design patterns, which are embodied in the architectural process. Therefore, the reuse of the architecture would be naive if only carried out based on the architectural views, i.e. without regard to the design reasoning behind the architectural process. In this paper we review an approach to defining new software architectures through the use of derivational analogy, i.e. by replaying the process, sequence of decisions, behind the definition of a previously defined architecture. We conclude that, without the design reasoning, the reuse of the architecture would be a risky process, which can violate original design assumptions and dependencies.
{"title":"Capturing and Replaying Architectural Knowledge through Derivational Analogy","authors":"I. Habli, T. Kelly","doi":"10.1109/SHARK-ADI.2007.6","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/SHARK-ADI.2007.6","url":null,"abstract":"The architecture definition activity of complex systems is intellectually intensive consuming much of the design time and budget. Rather than being regarded merely as a collection of views, software architecture can also be regarded as a collection of design decisions, such as tactics and design patterns, which are embodied in the architectural process. Therefore, the reuse of the architecture would be naive if only carried out based on the architectural views, i.e. without regard to the design reasoning behind the architectural process. In this paper we review an approach to defining new software architectures through the use of derivational analogy, i.e. by replaying the process, sequence of decisions, behind the definition of a previously defined architecture. We conclude that, without the design reasoning, the reuse of the architecture would be a risky process, which can violate original design assumptions and dependencies.","PeriodicalId":393813,"journal":{"name":"Second Workshop on Sharing and Reusing Architectural Knowledge - Architecture, Rationale, and Design Intent (SHARK/ADI'07: ICSE Workshops 2007)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2007-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124018719","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 : 2007-05-20DOI: 10.1109/SHARK-ADI.2007.3
M. Babar, R. Boer, Torgeir Dingsøyr, R. Farenhorst
The software architecture community has recently gained an increasing interest in managing architectural knowledge. However, up until now there have been no attempts to obtain an overview of the work in the field. In this paper we present a preliminary review on current approaches to architectural knowledge management. To this end, we compare approaches known from literature and encountered in industry with knowledge management theory. We found that in reports from research and practice there appears to be a preference to use the codification strategy. However, our observations of the software architecture industry show that organizations in general tend to use a personalization strategy unintentionally. This paper serves as a call for awareness of this gap between intention and reality, and questions the biased focus on intentional codification alone. We suggest to close this gap through focusing on hybrid approaches.
{"title":"Architectural Knowlege Management Strategies: Approaches in Research and Industry","authors":"M. Babar, R. Boer, Torgeir Dingsøyr, R. Farenhorst","doi":"10.1109/SHARK-ADI.2007.3","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/SHARK-ADI.2007.3","url":null,"abstract":"The software architecture community has recently gained an increasing interest in managing architectural knowledge. However, up until now there have been no attempts to obtain an overview of the work in the field. In this paper we present a preliminary review on current approaches to architectural knowledge management. To this end, we compare approaches known from literature and encountered in industry with knowledge management theory. We found that in reports from research and practice there appears to be a preference to use the codification strategy. However, our observations of the software architecture industry show that organizations in general tend to use a personalization strategy unintentionally. This paper serves as a call for awareness of this gap between intention and reality, and questions the biased focus on intentional codification alone. We suggest to close this gap through focusing on hybrid approaches.","PeriodicalId":393813,"journal":{"name":"Second Workshop on Sharing and Reusing Architectural Knowledge - Architecture, Rationale, and Design Intent (SHARK/ADI'07: ICSE Workshops 2007)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2007-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115242285","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 : 2007-05-20DOI: 10.1109/SHARK-ADI.2007.9
Rafael Capilla, F. Nava, Juan C. Dueñas
All software systems are built as a result of a set of design decisions that are made during the architecting phase. At present, there is still a lack of appropriate notations, methods and tools for recording and exploiting these architectural design decisions. In addition, the need for maintaining and evolving the decisions made in the past turns critical for the success of the evolution of the system. In this research paper we extend a previous work to detail those issues related to the evolution of architectural design decisions.
{"title":"Modeling and Documenting the Evolution of Architectural Design Decisions","authors":"Rafael Capilla, F. Nava, Juan C. Dueñas","doi":"10.1109/SHARK-ADI.2007.9","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/SHARK-ADI.2007.9","url":null,"abstract":"All software systems are built as a result of a set of design decisions that are made during the architecting phase. At present, there is still a lack of appropriate notations, methods and tools for recording and exploiting these architectural design decisions. In addition, the need for maintaining and evolving the decisions made in the past turns critical for the success of the evolution of the system. In this research paper we extend a previous work to detail those issues related to the evolution of architectural design decisions.","PeriodicalId":393813,"journal":{"name":"Second Workshop on Sharing and Reusing Architectural Knowledge - Architecture, Rationale, and Design Intent (SHARK/ADI'07: ICSE Workshops 2007)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2007-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125702220","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 : 2007-05-20DOI: 10.1109/SHARK-ADI.2007.13
Sebastian Herold, Andreas Metzger, A. Rausch, Heiko Stallbaum
Requirements engineering and architectural design are key activities for the successful development of software-intensive systems. Although both activities are strongly intertwined and interrelated, many steps to date are driven solely by the intuition and the architectural knowledge of individuals. Thus, systematic approaches are needed which could minimize the risks of wrong early requirements and architectural decisions and foster the explicit reuse of architectural knowledge especially for supporting early design decisions are. In this paper, we present our vision of supporting the early requirements and architectural decisions by making explicit the interactions between the early steps and artifacts in requirements engineering and architectural design and thereby reusing architectural knowledge. To this end, we propose to couple goal-oriented requirements engineering and compositional architecture development by means of a repository of reusable, generic architectural drivers.
{"title":"Towards Bridging the Gap between Goal-Oriented Requirements Engineering and Compositional Architecture Development","authors":"Sebastian Herold, Andreas Metzger, A. Rausch, Heiko Stallbaum","doi":"10.1109/SHARK-ADI.2007.13","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/SHARK-ADI.2007.13","url":null,"abstract":"Requirements engineering and architectural design are key activities for the successful development of software-intensive systems. Although both activities are strongly intertwined and interrelated, many steps to date are driven solely by the intuition and the architectural knowledge of individuals. Thus, systematic approaches are needed which could minimize the risks of wrong early requirements and architectural decisions and foster the explicit reuse of architectural knowledge especially for supporting early design decisions are. In this paper, we present our vision of supporting the early requirements and architectural decisions by making explicit the interactions between the early steps and artifacts in requirements engineering and architectural design and thereby reusing architectural knowledge. To this end, we propose to couple goal-oriented requirements engineering and compositional architecture development by means of a repository of reusable, generic architectural drivers.","PeriodicalId":393813,"journal":{"name":"Second Workshop on Sharing and Reusing Architectural Knowledge - Architecture, Rationale, and Design Intent (SHARK/ADI'07: ICSE Workshops 2007)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2007-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116565361","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 : 2007-05-20DOI: 10.1109/SHARK-ADI.2007.4
Paul Grisham, Matthew J. Hawthorne, D. Perry
As part of a graduate course on software architecture and design intent, we designed a class project in which teams of students performed software engineering tasks that required them to understand the design of an open source project and evolve the architectural design in response to a set of additional functional requirements. The students used intent-based design approaches and notation systems to document intent for architectural design features. We use the students' experiences with these methodologies to explore the potential usefulness of intent-based modeling approaches to system architecture, and also to gain insight into directions for further research.
{"title":"Architecture and Design Intent: An Experience Report","authors":"Paul Grisham, Matthew J. Hawthorne, D. Perry","doi":"10.1109/SHARK-ADI.2007.4","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/SHARK-ADI.2007.4","url":null,"abstract":"As part of a graduate course on software architecture and design intent, we designed a class project in which teams of students performed software engineering tasks that required them to understand the design of an open source project and evolve the architectural design in response to a set of additional functional requirements. The students used intent-based design approaches and notation systems to document intent for architectural design features. We use the students' experiences with these methodologies to explore the potential usefulness of intent-based modeling approaches to system architecture, and also to gain insight into directions for further research.","PeriodicalId":393813,"journal":{"name":"Second Workshop on Sharing and Reusing Architectural Knowledge - Architecture, Rationale, and Design Intent (SHARK/ADI'07: ICSE Workshops 2007)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2007-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"117262070","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：