Marc I. Kellner and H. Dieter Rombach. Session summary: Comparisons of software process descriptions. In Takuya Katayama, editor, Proceedings of the Sixth International Software Process Workshop, pages 7--18. IEEE Press, October 1990.  Home/Search   Document Not in Database   Summary   Related Articles   Check

.... modelling and project management approaches fail to incorporate and then capitalise upon human resources and their experiences [1, 5] Representation and incorporation of human aspects in modelling frameworks is commonly problematic for software (development and engineering) process research [3, 4, 8]. In response to these limitations the demand exists for the development of methods for description and registering knowledge about project resources, which provide support for effective solutions to the software engineering problems relevant to project resources. That is, there is a need to apply ....

M.I. Kellner, and H.D. Rombach, "Session Summary: Comparisons of software process descriptions", in Proceedings of the 6 th International Software Process Workshop , IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, 1991, pp. 7-18.

....and 74 Implicit Explicit Task Graphs Grammars Petri Nets Rules High Level Low Level Control Flow Decomposition Figure 3.6: Comparison of PMLs outline how the model might be applied in the APPL A process programming language. These families were chosen to cover most of the known PCEs [64]. Each PML style has its own strengths and weaknesses with respect to process modeling, and there is no perfect process modeling (some of these differences are overviewed in [60] Further, a particular PML might arbitrarily divert from the properties that identify its family. Nevertheless, ....

Marc I. Kellner and H. Dieter Rombach. Session summary: Comparisons of software process descriptions. In Takuya Katayama, editor, 6th International Software Process Workshop: Support for the Software Process, pages 7--18, Hakodate, Japan, October 1990. IEEE Computer Society Press.

....and (2) the knowledge of the kind of assistance to provide. All processcentered environments support (1) by definition. We are primarily concerned here with (2) Further, although process models may be expressed in a number of different paradigms Petri nets and grammars are also popular (see [11]) we limit the discussion to rules. Let s say, generally, that a rule consists of three main parts: precondition, action, and postcondition. The precondition specifies any prerequisites to the action, and the postcondition specifies any consequences. Many rule notations (logic programming, ....

Marc I. Kellner and H. Dieter Rombach. Session summary: Comparisons of software process descriptions. In 6th International Software Process Workshop: Support for the Software Process, pages 7--18, Hakodate, Japan, October 1990.

.... interoperability model may be applied to two other families of PSEEs categorized by the paradigm underlying their PMLs, namely Petri nets and Grammars (application to imperative process programming such as APPL A can be found in [7] These families, together with rules, cover most kinds of PSEE [33]. Since we take the existing PMLs as given, the uninitiated reader should see the cited references for background and justification of each approach to process modeling. 4.1 Petri Nets The Petri net [45] is a formalism for modeling concurrent systems, and it has been widely applied to software ....

Marc I. Kellner and H. Dieter Rombach. Session summary: Comparisons of software process descriptions. In Takuya Katayama, editor, 6th International Software Process Workshop: Support for the Software Process, pages 7--18, Hakodate, Japan, October 1990. IEEE Computer Society Press.

....incomplete models, and conflicting interfaces) and that the Elicit method has helped identify such quality problems in process documents. One can relate the Elicit method to the various approaches to process modelling based on formalisms such as APPL A, MVP L, HFSP, rules and others (see [11] for pointers to these formalisms) The modelling formalisms together with the tools supporting them impose certain constraints on how to represent process models. In contrast, the Elicit method does not propose any particular representation formalism because it is a life cycle model for eliciting ....

M.I Kellner and H.D. Rombach. Session Summary: Comparisons of Software Process Descriptions. In Proc. 6th Int. Software Process Workshop, Hakodate, Japan, October 1990.

....or executed by the PCE s process enactment engine. Such first order extensibility has been widely investigated for a decade or so, and several major paradigms for process modeling formalisms have been investigated, including rules, Petri nets, grammars, task graphs, and imperative code [20]. A related second order kind of extensibility involves the ability to modify or re engineer the process, perhaps Dr. Ben Shaul is now at Technion Israel Institute of Technology, Department of Electrical Engineering, Technion City, Haifa 32000, ISRAEL dynamically while a given process ....

M. I. Kellner and H. D. Rombach. Session summary: Comparisons of software process descriptions. In T. Katayama, editor, 6th International Software Process Workshop: Support for the Software Process, pages 7--18, Hakodate, Japan, October 1990. IEEE Computer Society Press.

No context found.

Marc I. Kellner and H. Dieter Rombach. Session summary: Comparisons of software process descriptions. In Takuya Katayama, editor, Proceedings International Software Process Workshop, pages 7--18. IEEE Press, October 1990.

....different instances of the quality aspect in question. An operational definition typically requires measurement. A tractable quality model is an operational definition which allows tracing of quality aspects through all relevant stages of a project. cess modeling languages have been developed [4], and first experiences regarding their practical usefulness are documented [5, 6, 7, 8, 9] Measurement technology is needed to define target data values for the qualities to be achieved by a project, to make the status of a project visible, to provide feedback that guides the performance of ....

Marc I. Kellner and H. Dieter Rombach. Session summary: Comparisons of software process descriptions. In Takuya Katayama, editor, Proceedings International Software Process Workshop, pages 7--18. IEEE Press, October 1990.

....different instances of the quality aspect in question. An operational definition typically requires measurement. A tractable quality model is an operational definition which allows tracing of quality aspects through all relevant stages of a project. cess modeling languages have been developed [4], and first experiences regarding their practical usefulness are documented [5, 6, 7, 8, 9] Measurement technology is needed to define target data values for the qualities to be achieved by a project, to make the status of a project visible, to provide feedback that guides the performance of ....

Marc I. Kellner and H. Dieter Rombach. Session summary: Comparisons of software process descriptions. In Takuya Katayama, editor, Proceedings of the 6 th International Software Process Workshop, pages 7--18. IEEE Press, October 1990.

No context found.

Marc I. Kellner and H. Dieter Rombach. Session summary: Comparisons of software process descriptions. In Takuya Katayama, editor, Proceedings of the Sixth International Software Process Workshop, pages 7--18. IEEE Press, October 1990.

Online articles have much greater impact   More about CiteSeer.IST   Add search form to your site   Submit documents   Feedback  

CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC