DOCSLIB.ORG

A Capability Maturity Model Integration (Cmmi ) Solution Using Telelogic Products and Services

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Capability Maturity Model Integration (Cmmi ) Solution Using Telelogic Products and Services A CAPABILITY MATURITY MODEL INTEGRATION (CMMISM) SOLUTION USING TELELOGIC PRODUCTS AND SERVICES by Jeffery T. Chandler Telelogic Prepared for the 2004 Telelogic Americas User Group Conference Abstract A CAPABILITY MATURITY MODEL INTEGRATION (CMMI) SOLUTION USING TELELOGIC PRODUCTS AND SERVICES CMMI best practices enable organizations to do the following: • more explicitly link management and engineering activities to business objectives • expand the scope of and visibility into the product life cycle and engineering activities to ensure that the product or service meets customer expectations • incorporate lessons learned from additional areas of best practice (e.g., measurement, risk management, and supplier management) • implement more robust high-maturity practices • address additional organizational functions critical to its products and services • more fully comply with relevant ISO standards Telelogic is the world-leading provider of solutions for advanced software and systems development. Integrating new technology and operational changes into an existing system often leads to extended costs and schedule overruns. Systems engineering can be adopted to provide the necessary engineering traceability throughout a project's development lifecycle and ensure that new technology successfully integrates with legacy systems. With world-class products and professional services, Telelogic provides a means to help organizations automate the best practices of CMMI. Telelogic has at least two roles: 1. Telelogic can Help with the CMMI Assessment 2. Telelogic can be Part of the CMMI Solution Author Biography Jeffery T. Chandler Jeff is a Senior Application Engineer with Telelogic North America. Currently, he provides technical support to sales for the Government Solutions Sales Team. He has over 7 years of experience in systems engineering and development with DoD contractors and 12 years of experience as an Army Officer, serving in the Field Artillery and the Acquisition Corps Branches. Prior to joining Telelogic in 2000, Jeff worked on the JSIMS contract (NATSIM, DOMINO, and JSIGSIM) developing simulation systems where he was instrumental in the successful deployment and implementation of DOORS. Jeff received his BSCE from the United States Military Academy in 1985, his MBA with a concentration in MIS from Loyola/Baltimore, MD in 1998, and his Masters in Telecommunications and Computers from George Washington University in 2000. Jeffery T. Chandler Sr. Application Engineer Telelogic (703) 708-1445 [email protected] SCENARIO First of all, I work for Telelogic, so there may appear to be bias. However, my appreciation of the benefits of using DOORS was established before Telelogic hired me. Additionally, my last two hires were a direct result of my DOORS expertise; I knew very little about the projects themselves, but I helped them successfully implement DOORS and meet objectives (more efficient requirements’ analysis, information reuse, etc). Sounds like “process improvement” to me. Telelogic is a world-leading supplier of tools and solutions for advanced systems and software development that help customers automate their lifecycle. Telelogic's solutions make development of systems and software faster, less labor-intensive, and more cost- effective and reliable. As an Application Engineer, I demonstrate the functionalities and capabilities of the tools and services that Telelogic offers. I work with DOORS, SYNERGY, TAU G2, Dashboard, DocExpress, the integrations of these tools, and the integrations with many third-party tools. I am the technical point of contact to help customers understand our products (installation, licensing, initial configurations as needed, etc). Since I have taken several of the classes myself, I can help customers determine the training they will need. From the CMMI website, “Process improvement has proven to increase product and service quality as organizations apply it to achieve their business objectives. Today, the CMMI Product Suite is at the forefront of process improvement by providing the latest best practices for product and service development and maintenance” (http://www.sei.cmu.edu/cmmi/adoption/cmmi-start.html) To me, it seems natural to combine process best practices with reliable development tools. With world-class products and professional services, Telelogic provides a means to help organizations automate the best practices of CMMI. Telelogic has at least two roles: 1. Telelogic can Help with the CMMI Assessment 2. Telelogic can be Part of the CMMI Solution 1 OBJECTIVE/PROBLEM I imported both the CMMI and the ARC (Appraisal Requirements for CMMI) into DOORS to allow me to analyze the information. I selected the Continuous Representation since it had the most components. Additionally, a customer I was working with had selected this representation. The Staged Representation could just as easily be used. CMMI is organized by model components: • Process Area Categories – Process Areas • Specific Goals – Specific Practices • Base Practices = Capability Level 1 • Advanced Practices Capability Level >= 2 • Typical Work Products • Subpractices • Discipline Amplifications • Generic Goals – Generic Practices • Generic Practice Elaborations • References A Continuous Representation of CMMI models reflect capability levels (related specific and generic practices for a process area that can improve the organization’s process associated with that process area). To achieve a capability level, satisfy the specific and generic goals for a process area at a particular capability level. The six capability levels are: 0. Incomplete 1. Performed 2. Managed 3. Defined 4. Quantitatively Managed 5. Optimizing For detailed descriptions of capability levels, see Chapter 4, “RESOURCES 1.1.” 2 Process Area 1 Process Area 2 Process Area n Specific Goals Generic Goals Specific Practices Generic Practices Capability Levels Figure 1: CMMI Model Components [FM103.HDA101.T103] [“RESOURCES 1.1”, page 12] Import CMMI to DOORS 1 Word Export to DOORS. Original document is 725 pages. Preparation included: 1.1 Removing 1.1.1 Title Page 1.1.2 Table of contents 1.1.3 Preface 1.1.4 Document table 1.2 Reformatting 1.2.1 Style mapping included 1.2.1.1 There were 237 styles in use 1.2.2 Removed extra line spacing (final page count 514 and on import 12,236 objects; 11,686 objects currently) 1.2.3 Maintain numbering scheme (as required by paragraph 1.4.7 of CMMI) 1.2.3.1 Example: SP x.y-z has same numbering in DOORS Import ARC to DOORS 1 Word Export to DOORS. Original document is 49 pages. Preparation included: 1.1 Removing 1.1.1 Title Page 1.1.2 Table of Contents 1.1.3 List of Tables 1.1.4 Preface 1.1.5 Acknowledgments 1.1.6 Where to Look for Additional Information 1.1.7 Feedback Information 1.1.8 Abstract 3 SOLUTION 1. Telelogic can Help with the CMMI Assessment Now that the information is in DOORS I am able to analyze it. I created Views to allow me to isolate specific information. For example, I filtered on the “Practice-to-Goal Relationship Table” sections to allow me to focus on the exact practices needed to achieve a respective capability level. Anyone could use this View to trace to their process plan as a self-assessment or as an aid during an actual assessment. For another View, I created a text attribute, “Telelogic contribution” to enter the information how Telelogic can help achieve and/or automate that practice. Along with the “Practice-to-Goal Relationship Table” sections, the resulting table shows how Telelogic can be a part of the solution. 2. Telelogic can be Part of the CMMI Solution By implementing Telelogic products and services, an organization could automate achieving a capability level. The following table has examples how: CMMI-SE/SW/IPPD/SS Continuous Telelogic contribution Representation 7 Process Areas 7.3 Engineering 7.3.1 Requirements Management 7.3.1.6 Practice-to-Goal Relationship Table SG 1 Manage Requirements [PA146.IG101] SP 1.1-1 Obtain an Understanding of Professional Services: Writing Better Requirements Requirements, Project Architecture Workshop for help with criteria for distinguishing appropriate requirements providers and developing criteria for evaluation and acceptance of requirements DOORS: capture, organize, analyze, and report on requirements; results of analyses against criteria for an agreed-to set of requirements SP 1.2-2 Obtain Commitment to Professional Services: Project Requirements Architecture Workshop to implement your process in DOORS DOORS: the central repository to obtain commitment to the requirements from 4 CMMI-SE/SW/IPPD/SS Continuous Telelogic contribution Representation the project participants. Documented commitments to requirements and requirements changes. SP 1.3-1 Manage Requirements Changes DOORS: Object History for specific requirement changes and Module Baseline (including Baseline Sets) for document versioning SP 1.4-2 Maintain Bidirectional Traceability DOORS: Requirements traceability of Requirements matrix and requirements tracking system (derived requirements, horizontal/functional decomposition) SP 1.5-1 Identify Inconsistencies between DOORS: "gold-plating" analysis - Project Work and Requirements traceability of work products to ensure all are linked to actual requirements GG 1 Achieve Specific Goals [CL102.GL101] GP 1.1 Perform Base Practices See Specific Goal section above GG 2 Institutionalize a Managed Process [CL103.GL101] GP 2.1 Establish an Organizational Policy Professional Services: Project Architecture Workshop to help establish and maintain
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Sysml Distilled: a Brief Guide to the Systems Modeling Language
    ptg11539604 Praise for SysML Distilled “In keeping with the outstanding tradition of Addison-Wesley’s techni- cal publications, Lenny Delligatti’s SysML Distilled does not disappoint. Lenny has done a masterful job of capturing the spirit of OMG SysML as a practical, standards-based modeling language to help systems engi- neers address growing system complexity. This book is loaded with matter-of-fact insights, starting with basic MBSE concepts to distin- guishing the subtle differences between use cases and scenarios to illu- mination on namespaces and SysML packages, and even speaks to some of the more esoteric SysML semantics such as token flows.” — Jeff Estefan, Principal Engineer, NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory “The power of a modeling language, such as SysML, is that it facilitates communication not only within systems engineering but across disci- plines and across the development life cycle. Many languages have the ptg11539604 potential to increase communication, but without an effective guide, they can fall short of that objective. In SysML Distilled, Lenny Delligatti combines just the right amount of technology with a common-sense approach to utilizing SysML toward achieving that communication. Having worked in systems and software engineering across many do- mains for the last 30 years, and having taught computer languages, UML, and SysML to many organizations and within the college setting, I find Lenny’s book an invaluable resource. He presents the concepts clearly and provides useful and pragmatic examples to get you off the ground quickly and enables you to be an effective modeler.” — Thomas W. Fargnoli, Lead Member of the Engineering Staff, Lockheed Martin “This book provides an excellent introduction to SysML.
    [Show full text]
  • Using Telelogic DOORS and Microsoft Visio to Model and Visualize
    Using DOORS & Visio to Model and Visualize Complex Business Processes Bob Sherman - [email protected] [email protected] Using Telelogic DOORS and Microsoft Visio to Model and Visualize Complex Business Processes - v1.0 © 2005 Galactic Solutions Group LLC – Authors: Bob Sherman ([email protected]), [email protected] 1 © Telelogic AB Agenda • The Unmet Need • The Solution – Strategy: Business Driven Application Lifecycle – Tactics: Business Modeling via DOORS & VISIO – Tactics: DOORS/VISIO Integration • Case Study Results Using Telelogic DOORS and Microsoft Visio to Model and Visualize Complex Business Processes - v1.0 © 2005 Galactic Solutions Group LLC – Authors: Bob Sherman ([email protected]), [email protected] 2 © Telelogic AB Chronic IT Project Problems Top IT Project Problems • User/Stakeholder Engagement Outages • Unclear Objectives • Incomplete or Changing Requirements *Standish Group Chaos Studies Using Telelogic DOORS and Microsoft Visio to Model and Visualize Complex Business Processes - v1.0 © 2005 Galactic Solutions Group LLC – Authors: Bob Sherman ([email protected]), [email protected] 3 © Telelogic AB Chronic IT Project Problems Rework • 35-65% of project budget *Standish Group spent on rework. • ~50% of rework is due to requirements errors * IEEE & University of Southern California Using Telelogic DOORS and Microsoft Visio to Model and Visualize Complex Business Processes - v1.0 © 2005 Galactic Solutions Group LLC – Authors:
    [Show full text]
  • Using Telelogic DOORS and Microsoft Visio to Model and Visualize Complex Business Processes
    Using Telelogic DOORS and Microsoft Visio to Model and Visualize Complex Business Processes “The Business Driven Application Lifecycle” Bob Sherman Procter & Gamble Pharmaceuticals [email protected] Michael Sutherland Galactic Solutions Group, LLC [email protected] Prepared for the Telelogic 2005 User Group Conference, Americas & Asia/Pacific http://www.telelogic.com/news/usergroup/us2005/index.cfm 24 October 2005 Abstract: The fact that most Information Technology (IT) projects fail as a result of requirements management problems is common knowledge. What is not commonly recognized is that the widely haled “use case” and Object Oriented Analysis and Design (OOAD) phenomenon have resulted in little (if any) abatement of IT project failures. In fact, ten years after the advent of these methods, every major IT industry research group remains aligned on the fact that these projects are still failing at an alarming rate (less than a 30% success rate). Ironically, the popularity of use case and OOAD (e.g. UML) methods may be doing more harm than good by diverting our attention away from addressing the real root cause of IT project failures (when you have a new hammer, everything looks like a nail). This paper asserts that, the real root cause of IT project failures centers around the failure to map requirements to an accurate, precise, comprehensive, optimized business model. This argument will be supported by a using a brief recap of the history of use case and OOAD methods to identify differences between the problems these methods were intended to address and the challenges of today’s IT projects.
    [Show full text]
  • Early Verification and Validation in Model-Based Design
    ® ® Early Verification and Validation in Model-Based Design Amory Wakefield Technical Marketing The MathWorks © 2008 TheMathWorks, Inc. ® ® Introductions I spend most of my time: A. Creating specifications and requirements (systems and software) B. Implementation based on specification and requirements created by somebody else (generating, writing, deploying, debugging code) C. Both D. None of the above 2 ® ® Address the Entire Development Process RequirementsRequirements Design System V&V Requirements Validation Environment Robustness Testing Modeling Standards Checking Physical Components Component V&V Algorithms Design Verification Model Testing G e H t e Coverage and Test Generation G a a n e nd r e n - e r Property Proving e n a ra t te e e G Code Verification Digital Embedded Code Correctness Electronics Software Processor-In-The Loop Testing VHDL, Verilog C, C++ FPGA ASIC MCU DSP Integration Testing Software Integration Testing Integration Hardware-in-the-Loop Testing Hardware Connectivity Implement 3 ® ® Methods for Verification and Validation Traceability Requirements to model and code Model to code Modeling and Coding Standards Modeling standards checking Coding standards checking Testing Model testing in simulation Processor-in-the-loop Proving Proving design properties Proving code correctness 4 ® ® Increasing Confidence in Your Designs Confidence Traceability Modeling and Coding Model and Code Proving Design Standards Checking Testing Properties and Code Correctness Verification Method 5 ® ® Traceability System V&V Comp. V&V Integration Functional Requirements Design Environment Physical Components Tracing RequirementsÙModel Simulink Verification and Validation Algorithms H G e Tracing ModelÙSource Code G an t e e d a n ne - r e ra e r t n a e t Real-Time Workshop Embedded Coder e e G Digital Embedded Electronics Software Tracing RequirementsÙSource Code VHDL, Verilog C, C++ Simulink Verification and Validation FPGA ASIC MCU DSP Integration Implement 6 ® ® Tracing RequirementsÙModel System V&V Comp.
    [Show full text]
  • Case No COMP/M.4747 Œ IBM / TELELOGIC REGULATION (EC)
    EN This text is made available for information purposes only. A summary of this decision is published in all Community languages in the Official Journal of the European Union. Case No COMP/M.4747 – IBM / TELELOGIC Only the English text is authentic. REGULATION (EC) No 139/2004 MERGER PROCEDURE Article 8(1) Date: 05/03/2008 Brussels, 05/03/2008 C(2008) 823 final PUBLIC VERSION COMMISSION DECISION of 05/03/2008 declaring a concentration to be compatible with the common market and the EEA Agreement (Case No COMP/M.4747 - IBM/ TELELOGIC) COMMISSION DECISION of 05/03/2008 declaring a concentration to be compatible with the common market and the EEA Agreement (Case No COMP/M.4747 - IBM/ TELELOGIC) (Only the English text is authentic) (Text with EEA relevance) THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, and in particular Article 57 thereof, Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 of 20 January 2004 on the control of concentrations between undertakings1, and in particular Article 8(1) thereof, Having regard to the Commission's decision of 3 October 2007 to initiate proceedings in this case, After consulting the Advisory Committee on Concentrations2, Having regard to the final report of the Hearing Officer in this case3, Whereas: 1 OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 2 OJ C ...,...200. , p.... 3 OJ C ...,...200. , p.... 2 I. INTRODUCTION 1. On 29 August 2007, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 and following a referral pursuant to Article 4(5) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 ("the Merger Regulation") by which the undertaking International Business Machines Corporation ("IBM", USA) acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Council Regulation control of the whole of the undertaking Telelogic AB ("Telelogic", Sweden) by way of a public bid which was announced on 11 June 2007.
    [Show full text]
  • Real Time UML
    Fr 5 January 22th-26th, 2007, Munich/Germany Real Time UML Bruce Powel Douglass Organized by: Lindlaustr. 2c, 53842 Troisdorf, Tel.: +49 (0)2241 2341-100, Fax.: +49 (0)2241 2341-199 www.oopconference.com RealReal--TimeTime UMLUML Bruce Powel Douglass, PhD Chief Evangelist Telelogic Systems and Software Modeling Division www.telelogic.com/modeling groups.yahoo.com/group/RT-UML 1 Real-Time UML © Telelogic AB Basics of UML • What is UML? – How do we capture requirements using UML? – How do we describe structure using UML? – How do we model communication using UML? – How do we describe behavior using UML? • The “Real-Time UML” Profile • The Harmony Process 2 Real-Time UML © Telelogic AB What is UML? 3 Real-Time UML © Telelogic AB What is UML? • Unified Modeling Language • Comprehensive full life-cycle 3rd Generation modeling language – Standardized in 1997 by the OMG – Created by a consortium of 12 companies from various domains – Telelogic/I-Logix a key contributor to the UML including the definition of behavioral modeling • Incorporates state of the art Software and Systems A&D concepts • Matches the growing complexity of real-time systems – Large scale systems, Networking, Web enabling, Data management • Extensible and configurable • Unprecedented inter-disciplinary market penetration – Used for both software and systems engineering • UML 2.0 is latest version (2.1 in process…) 4 Real-Time UML © Telelogic AB UML supports Key Technologies for Development Iterative Development Real-Time Frameworks Visual Modeling Automated Requirements-
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to OMG's Unified Modeling Language (UML) a Little
    07.02.2006 Introduction to OMG's Unified Modeling Language (UML) Dominic Hillenbrand CES - Chair for Embedded Systems (Prof. Dr. Jörg Henkel) Department of Computer Science University of Karlsruhe Chair for Embedded Systems Universität Karlsruhe (TH) <your Name> WS 2005-06 Software Engineering for Embedded Systems A Little History Late 1960s: ¾ Emergence of OO programming languages (Simula-67 language) ¾ Appearance of first OOA&D methodologies 1980s and early 1990s: ¾ Smalltalk (1972) ¾ Many competing general development methods and modelling languages (over 50) Alan Curtis Kay ¾ The “methods wars” „The best way to predict the Excursion: Structured Analysis & future is to Design together with structured invent it." programming preceded the OO- paradigm! Chair for Embedded Systems Universität Karlsruhe (TH) Dominic Hillenbrand WS 2005-06 1 07.02.2006 Software Engineering for Embedded Systems How things got started The Three Amigos and their three prominent key methods (mid 1990s): ¾ Grady Booch (Booch ’93 “OO Analysis and Design) ¾ Rumbaugh (Object Modelling Technique) ¾ Ivar Jacobson (OO Software Engineering) Chair for Embedded Systems Universität Karlsruhe (TH) Dominic Hillenbrand WS 2005-06 Software Engineering for Embedded Systems More Background 1995: Rumbaugh, Booch and Jacobson join forces in Rational: ¾ Develop the (Rational) Unified Process ¾ Develop the Unified Modelling Language (UML) Object Management Group (OMG): ¾ not-for-profit consortium ¾ produces and maintains computer industry specifications ¾ flagship specification is the multi- platform Model Driven Architecture (MDA) Chair for Embedded Systems Universität Karlsruhe (TH) Dominic Hillenbrand WS 2005-06 2 07.02.2006 Software Engineering for Embedded Systems What is UML? UML is a language –semantics& syntax ¾ Not a methodology! (like RUP; Waterfall & Spiral-Model) UML can be used to ¾ specify ¾ visualize ¾ document software artifacts Built upon fundamental OO concepts “industry’s best” engineering practices 13 types of diagrams Usually textual specifications in automobile industry.
    [Show full text]
  • Software & Systems Process Engineering Metamodel
    Date : October 2007 Software & Systems Process Engineering Metamodel Specification, v2.0 (Beta 2) OMG Adopted Specification with change bars OMG Document Number: ptc/2007-08-07 Standard document URL: http://www.omg.org/spec/SPEM/2.0/Beta2/PDF Associated Schema Files: (original .zip files: ptc/07-08-08, ptc/07-08-09) http://www.omg.org/spec/SPEM/20071101/SPEM2-Process-Behavior-Content.merged.cmof http://www.omg.org/spec/SPEM/20071101/Infrastructure.cmof http://www.omg.org/spec/SPEM/20071101/LM.cmof http://www.omg.org/spec/SPEM/20071101/SoftwareProcessEngineeringMetamodel.cmof http://www.omg.org/spec/SPEM/20071101/SPEM2-Method-Content.cmof http://www.omg.org/spec/SPEM/20071101/SPEM2-Process-Behavior-Content.cmof http://www.omg.org/spec/SPEM/20071101/SPEM2.cmof http://www.omg.org/spec/SPEM/20071101/SPEM2.merged.cmof http://www.omg.org/spec/SPEM/20071101/SPEM2-Method-Content.merged.cmof http://www.omg.org/spec/SPEM/20071101/SPEM 2.0 Base Plugin Profile.xmi http://www.omg.org/spec/SPEM/20071101/SPEM 2.0 UML2 Profile.xmi Copyright © 2004-2007, Adaptive Ltd. Copyright © 2004-2007, Fujitsu Copyright © 2004-2007, Fundacion European Software Institute Copyright © 2004-2007, International Business Machines Corporations Copyright © 1997-2007, Object Management Group Copyright © 2004-2007, Softeam USE OF SPECIFICATION - TERMS, CONDITIONS & NOTICES The material in this document details an Object Management Group specification in accordance with the terms, conditions and notices set forth below. This document does not represent a commitment to implement any portion of this specification in any company's products. The information contained in this document is subject to change without notice.
    [Show full text]
  • & Evocean Bridging the Enterprise Architecture to IT Architecture
    & Evocean Bridging the Enterprise Architecture to IT Architecture Gap Presented by Jog Raj 31st January 2008 © Telelogic AB Agenda • Introductions • The Business Challenge • What is Enterprise Architecture • Bridging the Business and IT gap • Service Orientated Architectures • Role of Tools in Architecture • Demonstration • Questions & Answers • Summary © Telelogic AB Telelogic At A Glance • Founded 1983 • HQ Malmö, Sweden • US HQ Irvine, California • Public Company Listed in 1999 • Development Sites USA, Sweden, UK, India © Telelogic AB Global Presence Over 40 offices around the world As of September 2004 © Telelogic AB Bridging the Enterprise Architecture to IT Architecture Gap © Telelogic AB Current Business Challenges • Hypercompetitive Market – Innovation – Ability to implement ideas • Mergers and Acquisitions • Governance and Compliance • Reduce Cost – Operational costs – IT Asset Management • Reuse of assets • Application Integration Costs • Risk Reduction and Mitigation © Telelogic AB A Growing Divide? Business Challenges and Opportunities Business Process Adaptability The Internet 1990s 2000s © Telelogic AB What is Enterprise Architecture? • A description of business and IT domains: – Mission, Strategy, Landscape, Organization, People, Locations – Processes, Technology, Information, Data, Applications • A description of the relationships between them • A set of graphical and textual models and artefacts that can be communicated in a common manner • An Enterprise Architecture supports an operating business in achieving its goals
    [Show full text]
  • Telelogic Tau 3.1 UML Tutorial © 2002-2007 Copyright Telelogic AB
    Telelogic Tau 3.1 UML Tutorial © 2002-2007 Copyright Telelogic AB. Terms of use Telelogic grants you the right to use the Program and the Documentation on one computer or in one local computer net- work at any one time according to the terms and conditions in the License. The Program and the Documentation are owned by Telelogic and are protected by national copyright laws and international copyright treaties. This License does not con- vey to you an interest in the Program or the Documentation, but only a limited right of use in accordance with the terms of this License. No part of this Documentation may be reproduced, transmitted, transcribed, stored in a retrieval system or translated into any language in any form except as provided in this License. Telelogic does not warrant that the Documentation will meet your requirements or that the operation of the Program will be according to the Documentation, uninterrupted and error free. You are solely responsible for the selection and operation of the Program to achieve your intended results and for the results actually obtained. Information in this Documentation is subject to change without notice. Trademarks Telelogic®, Telelogic DOORS®, Telelogic TAU®, Telelogic DocExpress®, Telelogic DOORSnet® and Telelogic Ac- tiveCM® are the registered trademarks of Telelogic. Telelogic DOORS®/Analyst™, Telelogic DOORS® XT™, Telelogic TAU®/Architect™ , Telelogic TAU®/Develop- er™ , Telelogic TAU®/Tester™ , Telelogic TAU®/Model Author™ , Telelogic SYNERGY™ , Telelogic SYNER- GY™/CM , Telelogic SYNERGY™/Change, Telelogic Dashboard™ and Telelogic Logiscope™ are trademarks of Tele- logic. All other trademarks are the properties of respective holders. ii Telelogic Tau 3.1 User Guide May 2007 How to contact Customer Support The Help Desk is the single point of contact for all support related commu- nication regarding the Telelogic Tau products: • Telelogic Help Desk at our offices.
    [Show full text]
  • Metamodelling for MDA
    Metamodelling for MDA First International Workshop York, UK, November 2003 Proceedings Edited by Andy Evans Paul Sammut James S. Willans Table of Contents Preface ........................................................ 4 Principles Calling a Spade a Spade in the MDA Infrastructure ................... 9 Colin Atkinson and Thomas K¨uhne Do MDA Transformations Preserve Meaning? An investigation into preservingsemantics ........................................... 13 Anneke Kleppe and Jos Warmer MDA components: Challenges and Opportunities ..................... 23 Jean B´ezivin, S´ebastien G´erard, Pierre-Alain Muller and Laurent Rioux SafetyChallengesforModelDrivenDevelopment ..................... 42 N. Audsley, P. M. Conmy, S. K. Crook-Dawkins and R. Hawkins Invited talk: UML2 - a language for MDA (putting the U, M and L intoUML)?................................................... 61 Alan Moore Languages and Applications Using an MDA approach to model traceability within a modelling framework .................................................... 62 John Dalton, Peter W Norman, Steve Whittle, and T Eshan Rajabally Services integration by models annotation and transformation .......... 77 Olivier Nano and Mireille Blay-Fornarino 1 A Metamodel of Prototypical Instances .............................. 93 Andy Evans, Girish Maskeri, Alan Moore Paul Sammut and James S. Willans Metamodelling of Transaction Configurations ......................... 106 StenLoecherandHeinrichHussmann Invitedtalk:MarketingtheMDAToolChain......................... 109 Stephen
    [Show full text]
  • UML Distilled Third Edition UML Distilled Third Edition
    Praise for UML Distilled “UML Distilled remains the best introduction to UML notation. Martin’s agile and pragmatic approach hits the sweet spot, and I wholeheartedly recommend it!” —Craig Larman Author of Applying UML and Patterns “Fowler cuts through the complexity of UML to get users started quickly.” —Jim Rumbaugh Author and originator of UML “Martin Fowler’s UML Distilled is an excellent way to get started with UML. In fact for most users, UML Distilled contains all you need to apply UML suc- cessfully. As Martin points out, UML can be used in many ways, but the most common is as a widely recognized notation for sketching designs. This book does an excellent job of distilling the essence of UML. Highly recommended.” —Steve Cook Software Architect Microsoft Corporation “Short books on UML are better than long books on UML. This is still the best short book on UML. In fact, it’s the best short book on many subjects.” —Alistair Cockburn Author and President, Humans and Technology “The book is immensely useful, readable, and—one of its great virtues— delightfully concise for the immense scope of its subject. If you only buy one book on UML, this should be it.” —Andy Carmichael BetterSoftwareFaster, Ltd. “If you’re using UML, this book should never be out of reach.” —John Crupi Distinguished Engineer, Sun Microsystems Coauthor of Core J2EE™ Patterns “Anyone doing UML modeling, learning UML, reading UML, or building UML tools should have this latest edition. (I own all editions.) There is lots of good, useful information; generally, just enough to be useful, but not too much to be dry.
    [Show full text]