S. M. Sutton, P. L. Tarr, and L. J. Osterweil. An analysis of process languages. Technical Report 95 -- 78, Dept. of Computer Science, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, 1995. Home/Search Document Details and Download
Summary Related Articles Check |
This paper is cited in the following contexts:
Formalizing (and Reasoning About) the Specifications of.. - Trajcevski, Baral, Lobo (Correct)
....and execution of workflows. Since the beginning of eighties, the software engineering research has been pointing out the importance of knowledge representation being thoroughly captured during the requirements specifications stage, before moving on with analysis design and implementation [13, 46, 47]. This is an important aspect in workflow process specification in many applications (e.g. Virtual Enterprises) 2, 24] The specification stage involves experts from different domains, representatives of different organizations and policies (as Whorf s hypothesis from psycholinguistics says: ....
.... full blown theorem provers and using planners to generate modules. Levesque et al. 37] discuss the difference between the action approach and traditional approach of program correctness . For the implementation of our tool, we followed the principles of process languages design surveyed in [47](e.g. pictures help in improving intuition and communication cooperation; they work best when they depict modest ammount of information; the use of semantically deep formalism supports many desirable properties) There are 3 main clasess: 1. MainFrame.java the brain which creates ....
S. M. Sutton, P. L. Tarr, and L. J. Osterweil. An analysis of process languages. Technical Report 95 -- 78, Dept. of Computer Science, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, 1995.
How to Construct Formal Arguments that Persuade Certifiers - Moore, Klinker, Mihelcic (1999) (1 citation) (Correct)
....A well defined process permits a focused view of system refinement in which certifiers and developers can track the evolution of the system and assess when, where and why progress is hampered. Many tools can help define, partially) automate, and, when appropriate, enforce the development process [21, 43]. Primarily, developers benefit from process automation, through the integration federation of development tools, and certifiers benefit from process enforcement, by ensuring that the process is applied completely and consistently. However, certifiers also gain from process automation when ....
S.M. Sutton, Jr., P.L. Tarr, and L.J. Osterweil. An analysis of process languages. CMPSCI Technical Report 95-78, University of Massachusetts, August 1995.
Beyond Process Modelling Languages: A Metamodelling Approach to.. - Koskinen (Correct)
....concepts and structures with variations, the demands set for the conceptual coverage of a PML supported by a metaCASE environment are increasing as well. In traditional process support environments the evolving language requirements are addressed through three alternative language architectures [30]. The first alternative is a single, semantically broad language that provides comprehensive and integrated syntax and semantics across multiple process aspects and subdomains. However, this kind of language needs to be extremely large and it is still unlikely to support all required aspects. The ....
....is to use a common core language with specializable extensions. How to define the core language is still a problem, and whether a certain capability should belong to the core or to an extension. Also, translation between the core language and the various extensions is required. As Sutton et al. [30] further point out, each of these approaches seems plausible in principle but each also suffers from limitations and more work is warranted on all approaches. Due to the exceptional range of method alternatives, also the conceptual coverage of the PMLs used in metaCASE needs to be exceptionally ....
Sutton, S.M., Tarr, P.L., Osterweil, L.J., "An analysis of Process Languages," CMPSCI Technical Report 95-78, Dept. of Computer Science, Univ. of Massachusetts, USA, August 1995.
Project GIPSY - Facing the Challenge of Future Integrated Software .. - Murer (1997) (Correct)
No context found.
Sutton, S., Tarr , P., Osterweil, L.:"An Analysis of Process Languages", CMPSCI Technical Report 95-78, August 1995
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