By Topic

Supplementing process-oriented with structure-oriented design explanation within formal object-oriented method

Sign In

Cookies must be enabled to login.After enabling cookies , please use refresh or reload or ctrl+f5 on the browser for the login options.

Formats Non-Member Member
$33 $13
Learn how you can qualify for the best price for this item!
Become an IEEE Member or Subscribe to
IEEE Xplore for exclusive pricing!
close button

puzzle piece

IEEE membership options for an individual and IEEE Xplore subscriptions for an organization offer the most affordable access to essential journal articles, conference papers, standards, eBooks, and eLearning courses.

Learn more about:

IEEE membership

IEEE Xplore subscriptions

3 Author(s)
Nguyen, L. ; Sch. of Manage. Inf. Syst., Deakin Univ., Geelong, Vic., Australia ; Swatman, P.A. ; Shanks, G.

This paper reports the results from an action research project which studies the benefits of documenting the evolution and the rationale for the evolution of a requirements specification. Earlier research into the use of ad hoc design explanation, in which design decisions were documented using the IBIS notation (Issue Based Information System) as they were made, found both benefits and weaknesses of the approach. The weaknesses suggested an investigation into the complementary use of a post hoc notation-QOC (Question-Option-Criteria). This study was undertaken with a view to understanding the potential contribution of supplementing the IBIS approach with additional rationale reported using QOC. This study demonstrated that both notations were useful. The study resulted in a deeper understanding of the process of documenting the evolution of the requirements and the rationale for the evolution. The study also led to a few suggestions about how to use both the QOC and IBIS notations effectively

Published in:

Software Engineering Conference, 1998. Proceedings. 1998 Australian

Date of Conference:

9-13 Nov 1998