Mary Shaw and Paul C. Clements. A field guide to boxology: Preliminary classification of architectural styles for software systems. In Proceedings of the 21st International Computer Software and Applications Conference, pages 6--13. IEEE Computer Society, 1997.  Home/Search   Document Details and Download   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....and keeping design options open remains to be a laborintensive task. A number of approaches have made progress towards providing assistance to software architects. Early works include Shaw and Clements classification of architectural styles that had appeared in the published literature [8]. Each style is categorized according to its characteristics with respect to constituent parts (components and connectors) control issues, data issues, control and data interaction issues, and reasoning. Moreover, intuition and rules of thumb on choosing styles to fit the problem are discussed as ....

....the user in manually mapping each requirement specification to one or more architecturally significant properties. Figure 2 illustrates an example of a partial decision tree with only the properties that are significant in choosing architectural styles (the ideas in this example are adapted from [4, 8]) We use decision node to refer to both interior node and leaf node in the decision tree, and property node to refer to leaf node only. Here is how the mapping is achieved. For each requirement specified, starting at the root of the decision tree, present the user with the choices represented by ....

M. Shaw and P. Clements. A field guide to boxology: Preliminary classification of architectural styles for software systems, 1996.

....methodologies provide little in the way of support for these problems. Typically, architectures are verified in terms of type compatibility between (required and provided) interfaces. In addition, checks may be carried out on the validity of architectures against certain style rules [Shaw96][Medvidovic00] However, this is not sufficient to capture the more subtle problems associated with unwanted interactions between components. This is an area that would benefit greatly from the application of techniques from feature interaction research. In particular, a hybrid approach (see ....

Shaw M., Clements P., "A Field Guide to Boxology: Preliminary Classification of Architectural Styles for Software Systems, Computer Science Department and Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, April 1996.

....be at the core of the consensus view of software architecture researchers: Software architecture is concerned with system structure organization of the software, assignment of responsibilities to components, and assurance that the components interactions satisfy the system requirements. Shaw Clements 97] As with design, all software systems have an architecture. Sometimes the architecture is explicit, perhaps conforming to certain standards or patterns, sometimes it is implicit. Where an architecture is explicit and targeted on more than one system, it is known as a reference architecture, or a ....

M. Shaw and P. Clements. A Field Guide to Boxology: Preliminary Classification of Architectural Styles for Software Systems. In Proceedings COMPSAC97, 21st Int'l Computer Software and Applications Conference, pages 6--13, 1997.

....to understand their strengths and weaknesses in order to enable the selection of styles most appropriate for a given application. Attempts have been made to develop systematic techniques for dealing with architectural styles resulting in formalisms to describe styles [1,15] preliminary taxonomies [29], and informal discussions of the differences between a newly codified style and existing styles that have influenced it [11,31] However, for the most part these studies fail to clarify the key dimensions along which one architectural style may differ from another. Another related, critical ....

....architectural styles and their effective implementation based on architectural primitives will mitigate such difficulties and make principled use of styles more feasible. Identifying primitives of architectural styles requires a systematic characterization of styles, but existing classifications [29] do not go beyond empirical comparisons of styles and provide little information about the underlying style elements. Moreover, since many architectural styles are available to an architect, a precise understanding of the relative merits and limitations of different styles in terms of comparable ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

M. Shaw and P. Clements, "A Field Guide to Boxology: Preliminary Classification of Architectural Styles for Software Systems", Proc. COMPSAC'97, Washington, DC, Aug. 1997, pp. 6-13.

....systems can be reused immediately, when complete re testing is necessary, or when just parts of the systems need additional verification. 10.2. 1 Software components in real time systems There exists yet no commonly agreed upon definition of what constitutes a software component [103] 25][98][32] 2] 15] 18] Most people do however agree that the concept of components is the idea of reusable software entities. In this section, for the sake of enabling analysis of components in safety critical realtime systems we do not only define a component in terms of software. We define a component ....

Shaw M., Clements P., A field guide to boxology: preliminary classification of architectural styles. In proc. 21 Annual International Computer Software and Applications Conference, 1997 (COMPSAC '97). ISBN: 0-8186-8105-5.

.... the feasibility of the proposed approach for the C2 architectural style, and suggest their application to other architectural styles also belonging to the interacting processes style category, which are styles dominated by communication patterns among independent, usually concurrent, processes [19]. LowWater Pump WaterFlow conn2 conn1 iP bottom iP top Pump Abnormal iP internal IdealPump PumpNormal bottom PumpNormal top PumpNormal Pump ControlStation conn3 Sensor Sensor Figure 5. C2 Configuration for Fault Tolerant PumpControlStation ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Paulo Guerra is ....

M. Shaw, and P. Clements. A Field Guide to Boxology: Preliminary Classification of Architectural Styles for Software Systems. In Proceedings of the COMPSAC97, First International Computer Software and Applications Conference, 1997.

....be at the core of the consensus view of software architecture researchers: Software architecture is concerned with system structure organization of the software, assignment of responsibilities to components, and assurance that the components interactions satisfy the system requirements. Shaw Clements 97] As with design, all software systems have an architecture. Sometimes the architecture is explicit, perhaps conforming to certain standards or patterns, sometimes it is implicit. Where an architecture is explicit and targeted on more than one system, it is known as a reference architecture, or a ....

M. Shaw and P. Clements. A Field Guide to Boxology: Preliminary Classification of Architectural Styles for Software Systems. In Proceedings COMPSAC97, 21st Int'l Computer Software and Applications Conference, pages 6--13, 1997.

.... governing their design and evolution over time [Clements 96] Architectural style a set of design rules that identify the kinds of components and connectors that may be used to compose a system or subsystem, together with local or global constraints on the way the composition is done [Shaw, Clements 97] Baseline architectural style the initial architectural style (or styles) used to describe the software architecture of the system. In this work, the baseline architectural style is important since it guides the selection of COTS products to be integrated. Component a software or ....

....among the components. Software architecture has to be separated from the term architectural style, which is used to describe common structures of components and connectors, e.g. the client server architectural style. A software architecture could make use of several architectural styles. In [Shaw, Clements 97] 4 categories of characteristics that differentiate architectural styles was identified: Components and connectors . What components are assumed to be in the system integration What types of connectors are assumed to be used in the system Examples of connectors include remote procedure ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Shaw, M., Clements, P., "A Field Guide to Boxology: Preliminary classification of Architectural Styles for Software Systems", Proceedings COMPSAC97, 21 st Int'l Computer Software and Application Conference, August 1997, pp. 6-13.

....regarding configuration and coordination constraints on a systems components. Characteristics defined with respect to architectural styles include those that describe the various types of computational elements and connectors, data issues, control issues, and control data interaction issues [A96, AG97, BCTW96, G97, GMW97, SC97, STI97]. These architectural characteristics provide details that further differentiate 7 individual styles, their extensions and specializations. Characteristics have been viewed with respect to their potential impact on interoperability [GAO95] However, only subsets based on style constraints have ....

....that further differentiate 7 individual styles, their extensions and specializations. Characteristics have been viewed with respect to their potential impact on interoperability [GAO95] However, only subsets based on style constraints have been examined for their role in integration issues [A96, AG97, BCTW96, G97, GMW97, SC97, STI97]. Our previous research partitions architectural characteristics across two viewpoints: component level and application level. Component level characteristics contribute to an understanding of the components exposed interface to other external subsystems. Application level characteristics address ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Shaw, M., and Clements, P. A Field Guide to Boxology: Preliminary Classification of Architectural Styles for Software Systems. In, 1st International Computer Software and Applications Conference, (1997). Washington, D.C.

....1. 5 The Architectural Community A number of papers from the Software Engineering Institute (SEI) at Carnegie Mellon University (CMU) were published around 1993, pointing out the direction of the forthcoming research by Gregory Abowd, Robert Allen, Paul Clements, David Garlan, and Mary Shaw [1,19,34]. Shaw and Garlan also wrote a widely referenced book in 1996 [35] Another influential book is [3] by Len Bass, Clements, and Rick Kazman. Both these books contain thorough surveys and serves as good guides for the novice architect. The two analysis methods we will discuss were described by ....

....Please note that some elements in the figures describing the architectures below look similar but have different semantics; arrows may e.g. denote data flow, function calls or some other type of connection. 3.1. 1 Pipe and Filter In a pipe and filter system the data flow in the system is in focus [3,34,35,43]. There are a number of computational components, where output from one component forms the input to the next. A typical example is the use of Unix pipes. See Figure 4, where each box is a processing unit, and an arrow represents data flow 2 . In its purest form, the different components are ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Shaw M. and Clements P., "A Field Guide to Boxology: Preliminary Classification of Architectural Styles for Software Systems", In Proceedings of The 21st Computer Software and Applications Conference, 1994.

....characteristics have been researched to further differentiate individual styles, their extensions, and specializations. This set of characteristics includes descriptions of the various types of computational elements, connectors, data issues, control issues, and control data interaction issues [1,4,5,13,15,28,30]. Architectural characteristics have been viewed with respect to their contribution to component interoperability [1,4,5,13,15,28,30,32] However, there lacks consistency among the abstraction levels of the characteristics examined, including when they would be known by an application and how they ....

.... of characteristics includes descriptions of the various types of computational elements, connectors, data issues, control issues, and control data interaction issues [1,4,5,13,15,28,30] Architectural characteristics have been viewed with respect to their contribution to component interoperability [1,4,5,13,15,28,30,32]. However, there lacks consistency among the abstraction levels of the characteristics examined, including when they would be known by an application and how they related to each other. We have found that it is feasible and desirable to limit assessment to abstract characteristics and to separate ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Shaw, M., Clements, P. A Field Guide to Boxology: Preliminary Classification of Architectural Styles for Software Systems. In, 1st Intl Computer Software and Applications Conference. 6-17, 1997.

.... SG96] Styles have been delineated which, if used, prescribe exact properties or characteristics of the system [SG96] These characteristics have been previously distinguished to provide details that further differentiate architectural styles, such as pipe and filter from event based systems [SC97]. In turn, 4 subsets based on style constraints have been examined and compared for their role in integration issues [ABD96, AG97, GAO95, SC97, SIT97, BCTW95, GAC97] Nonetheless, styles do not encompass all possible functionality available in present day systems, thus limiting the benefit of such ....

.... These characteristics have been previously distinguished to provide details that further differentiate architectural styles, such as pipe and filter from event based systems [SC97] In turn, 4 subsets based on style constraints have been examined and compared for their role in integration issues [ABD96, AG97, GAO95, SC97, SIT97, BCTW95, GAC97]. Nonetheless, styles do not encompass all possible functionality available in present day systems, thus limiting the benefit of such analysis. The focus of this thesis is the identification and organization of fundamental architectural characteristic sets for explicit consideration as culprits ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Shaw, M., Clements, P. A Field Guide to Boxology: Preliminary Classification of Architectural Styles for Software Systems. In, 1st International Computer Software and Applications Conference. Washington, D.C., 6-17, 1997.

....on application architectures, we must also study and formalize the fundamental architectural abstractions that middleware itself comprises. This second thrust thus forms the theoretical foundation of multioperability. It is based on our preliminary studies of architectural characteristics [SC97, GAO95, YBB99] that contribute to software interoperability problems and the fundamental integration building blocks that underlie middleware. To 3 date, we have classified specific architectural characteristics that inhibit component interoperability during system integration and play a part in middleware ....

M. Shaw & P. Clements. A field guide to boxology: Preliminary classification of architectural styles for software systems. Proc. COMPSAC97 and 1st Int'l Computer Software & Applications Conf., Aug. 1997.

....reasons for interoperability problems among seemingly open software components [12] On this basis, characteristics have been viewed with respect to their potential impact on interoperability. However, only subsets based on style constraints have been examined for their role in integration issues [1,3,4,10,12,28,30]. To resolve interoperability problems, an integration architecture must be constructed. Integration architectures are composed of multiple connectors. Connectors have become increasingly important in software architecture analysis, having been raised to first class status in many descriptions ....

....we briefly present the characteristics that we use throughout the remainder of the paper. Characteristics defined with respect to architectural styles include those that describe the various types of components and connectors, data issues, control issues, and control data interaction issues [1,3,4,10,12,28,30]. These architectural characteristics provide details that further differentiate individual styles, their extensions and specializations. Our previous research suggests that it is feasible and desirable in analysis to partition architectural characteristics across two viewpoints: component level ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Shaw, M., Clements, P. A Field Guide to Boxology: Preliminary Classification of Architectural Styles for Software Systems, 1st Int l Computer Software and Applications Conference (1997), Washington, D.C., 6-17.

.... system is a highlevel description of its computational elements, the means by which they interact, and the structural constraints on interaction [29,32] On the basis of architecture mismatch, characteristics have been specifically viewed with respect to their potential impact on interoperability [1,2,3,4,10,13,31,33]. We have expanded on this effort to classify and relate published characteristics resulting in a highly relevant set for interoperability analysis [8] Connectors have become increasingly important in software architecture analysis, having been relegated to first class status in many ....

Shaw, M., Clements, P. A Field Guide to Boxology: Preliminary Classification of Architectural Styles for Software Systems. In, 1st International Computer Software and Applications Conference. Washington, D.C., 617, 1997.

No context found.

Mary Shaw and Paul C. Clements. A field guide to boxology: Preliminary classification of architectural styles for software systems. In Proceedings of the 21st International Computer Software and Applications Conference, pages 6--13. IEEE Computer Society, 1997.

No context found.

Shaw, M., and Clements, P. C. A field guide to boxology: Preliminary classification of architectural styles for software systems. In Proceedings of the 21st International Computer Software and Applications Conference (1997), IEEE Computer Society, pp. 6--13.

No context found.

Mary Shaw and Paul C. Clements. A field guide to boxology: Preliminary classification of architectural styles for software systems. In Proceedings of the 21st International Computer Software and Applications Conference, pages 6--13. IEEE Computer Society, 1997.

No context found.

Shaw M, Clements P (1997) A Field Guide to Boxology: Preliminary Classification of Architectural Styles for Software Systems. In: COMPSAC, 21st Int'l Computer Software and Applications Conference

No context found.

. Mary Shaw, and Paul Clements, A Field Guide to Boxology: Preliminary Classification of Architectural Styles for Software Systems, Proceeding of the 2 nd International Software Architecture Workshop (ISW-2), San Francisco, CA, USA, October 1996, pp. 50 54 190

No context found.

Shaw, M., Clements, P., "A Field Guide to Boxology: Preliminary Classification of Architectural Styles for Software Systems," Proceedings of the 21st International Computer Software and Applications Conference (COMPSAC `97), August 1997, pp. 6-13.

No context found.

M. Shaw and P. Clements. A field guide to boxology: Preliminary classification of architectural styles for software systems, 1996.

No context found.

Shaw M, Clements P (1997) A Field Guide to Boxology: Preliminary Classification of Architectural Styles for Software Systems. In: COMPSAC, 21st Int'l Computer Software and Applications Conference

No context found.

Mary Shaw, and Paul Clements. A Field Guide to Boxology: Preliminary Classification of Architectural Styles for Software Systems. Computer Science Department and Software Engineering Institute. Carnegie Mellon University. Pittsburgh, PA, April 1996. USA.

No context found.

Mary Shaw and Paul Clements. A field guide to boxology: preliminary classification of architectural styles for software systems. Proc. COMPSAC97 and 1st Int'l Computer Software and Applications Conference, August 1997, pp. 6-13.

First 50 documents

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