Two Complementary Major European Methodologies for Information Systems Engineering
Buch, Englisch, 322 Seiten, Format (B × H): 210 mm x 279 mm, Gewicht: 793 g
ISBN: 978-3-540-55380-9
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
documentation is constantly refined as detailed under 1.1 Purpose standing of the requirement increase. The CCT A of the UK government and Siemens For project management purposes the SSADM life Nixdorf (SNI) have undertaken a joint project to com cycle is defined in terms of work packages, modules, pare the CCTA's methodology SSADM and Siemens stages and steps. Each work package is completed when Nixdorf's product GRAPES]). SSADM is an analysis a specified set of documentation is produced and satis and design methodology for computer systems. fies specified quality criteria. All activities undertaken at GRAPES is a graphical language used within the each point are those necessary to produce the required framework provided by the DOMINO@: process tech documentation. nology of Siemens Nixdorf for analysis and design of information systems. (In the 1991 Statement of Direc The analysis is undertaken concentrating on three key tion it was declared the Siemens Nixdorf main line for perspectives: modelling technology.) The study was undertaken in February and March 1991. • functions (users' views of system processing to react to events) The goal of the study was to compare SSADM and • events (real-world business events, e.g. "receipt of DOMINO/GRAPES to discover whether both application"; or system-generated, e.g. end-of-month approaches elicit the same knowledge about a system.
Zielgruppe
Research
Autoren/Hrsg.
Weitere Infos & Material
1 Introduction.- 1.1 Purpose.- 1.2 What is Being Compared?.- 1.3 Intended Audience.- 1.4 Study Assumptions.- 1.5 The Task.- 1.6 The Comparison Study.- 1.7 Overview of the Case Study.- 1.8 Summary.- 2 Overview of Both Methods.- 2.1 Overview of SSADM.- 2.2 Overview of DOMINO/GRAPES.- 3 Motivation, Background and Philosophy.- 3.1 SSADM.- 3.2 GRAPES History and Development.- 3.3 Comparison.- 4 Methodology Style.- 4.1 SSADM Style.- 4.2 GRAPES Style.- 4.3 Comparison of SSADM and GRAPES Styles.- 5 Architecture of the Developed Systems.- 5.1 SSADM Architecture.- 5.2 GRAPES Processing Architecture.- 5.3 Examples of the SSADM Architecture in the Hi-Ho Case Study.- 5.4 Examples of GRAPES’s Processing Architecture in the Hi-Ho Case Study.- 5.5 Comparison of the Architecture of End-Products of GRAPES & SSADM.- 6 Life Cycles.- 6.1 The SSADM Life Cycle.- 6.2 The DOMINO Life Cycle.- 6.3 Coverage of the SSADM Life Cycle in the Hi-Ho Case Study.- 6.4 Coverage of the GRAPES Life Cycle in the Hi-Ho Case Study.- 6.5 Comparison of the GRAPES and SSADM Life Cycles.- 7 Fact Representation & Syntax.- 7.1 Fact Representation & Syntax in SSADM.- 7.2 Fact Representation & Syntax in GRAPES.- 7.3 Examples of the SSADM Fact Representation & Syntax.- 7.4 Examples of the GRAPES Fact Representation & Syntax.- 7.5 Comparison of the GRAPES & SSADM Fact Representation & Syntax.- 8 The Knowledge Collection Process.- 8.1 Knowledge Collection in SSADM.- 8.2 Knowledge Collection in GRAPES.- 8.3 Examples of the SSADM Knowledge Collection Process.- 8.4 Examples of the GRAPES Knowledge Collection Process.- 8.5 Comparison of the GRAPES and SSADM Knowledge Collection Processes.- 9 Transformations.- 9.1 Transformations in SSADM.- 9.2 Transformations in GRAPES.- 9.3 Examples of the SSADM Transformations.- 9.4Examples of the GRAPES Transformations.- 9.5 Comparison of the GRAPES and SSADM Transformations.- 10 Conclusions.- 10.1 Answers to Specific Questions.- 10.2 Opportunities for Harmonization of GRAPES and SSADM.- Annex 1.- The Hi-Ho Recruitment Case Study.- The current Hi-Ho system.- Requirements for the new Hi-Ho system.- Sample forms in use in the current system.- Annex 2.- Hi-Ho SSADM Development.- Data flow diagrams.- Logical data model.- Logical data model-data store cross-references.- Enquiry access paths.- LDM enhanced with RDA results.- Results of ELH analysis, 1st pass.- Further DFD & LDM documentation.- Entity life histories after 2nd pass.- ECDs after 2nd pass.- After specification of deletion strategy.- Update process models.- Enquiry process models.- Function DFD equivalents.- Function input structures.- Probable function processing from stage 6.- Input/output data.- Annex 3.- Hi-Ho GRAPES Development.- Model of Required System.- Static structure.- Communication.- Behaviour.- Model hierarchy.- Reusable units.- Model of Current Situation.- Static structure.- Communication.- Behaviour.- Annex 4.- Hi-Ho SSADM Development Using Super-Events.- Annex 5.- Hi-Ho GRAPES Intermediate Diagrams.- References.
