Systems Modeling Language (Sysml) 3Rd Revised OMG Submission
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Systems Modeling Language (SysML) 3rd Revised OMG Submission SysML Partners www.sysml.org 2 February 2005 Agenda Overview Changes since v. 0.85 INCOSE IW review feedback Submission specifics Technical issues 2 Overview SysML Partners Informal partnership of modeling tool users, vendors, and government agencies organized in May 2003 to respond to UML for Systems Engineering RFP (OMG doc# ad/03-03-41) Charter The SysML Partners are collaborating to define a modeling language for systems engineering applications, called Systems Modeling Language (SysML). SysML will customize UML 2 to support the specification, analysis, design, verification and validation of a broad range of complex systems 4 SysML Partners Partners Industry American Systems, BAE SYSTEMS, Boeing, Deere & Company, EADS Astrium, Eurostep, Israel Aircraft Industries, Lockheed Martin, Motorola, Northrop Grumman, oose.de, Raytheon, THALES Government DoD/OSD, NASA/JPL, NIST Vendors Artisan, Ceira, EmbeddedPlus, Gentleware, IBM, I-Logix, PivotPoint Technology, Popkin, Project Technology, 3SL, Telelogic, Vitech Organizations INCOSE Liaisons AP-233, CCSDS, EAST, INCOSE, Rosetta 5 SysML Milestones UML for SE RFP issued – 28 March 2003 Kickoff meeting – 6 May 2003 Overview presentation to OMG ADTF – 27 Oct. 2003 Initial draft submitted to OMG – 12 Jan. 2004 INCOSE Review – 25-26 Jan. 2004 INCOSE Review – 25 May 2004 Revised submission to OMG – 2 Aug. 2004 nd 2 Revised submission to OMG – 11 Oct. 2004 rd 3 Revised submission to OMG – 10 Jan. 2005 INCOSE Review – 29-30 Jan. 2005 OMG technology adoption – H2 2005 6 SysML v. 0.9 is a Critical Milestone rd 3 revised submission to OMG doc# ad/05-01-03 Core systems engineering diagrams are stabilizing Several vendors have begun H1 2005 prototype efforts Artisan, EmbeddedPlus, I-Logix, Telelogic others TBA Public discussion list and feedback page launched [email protected] www.SysML.org/feedback.htm 7 Requirements Summary Structure e.g., system hierarchy, interconnection Behavior e.g., function-based behavior, state-based behavior Properties e.g., parametric models, time property Requirements e.g., requirements hierarchy, traceability Verification e.g., test cases, verification results Other e.g., trade studies 8 UML 2 Reuse 9 SysML Diagram Taxonomy Derived from UML 2 Composite Structure 10 SysML Specification Outline Preface Part I - Introduction Part II – Structural Constructs Classes Assemblies Parametrics Part III – Behavioral Constructs Activities Interactions State Machines Use Cases Part IV – Cross Cutting Constructs Allocations Auxiliary Constructs Requirements Profiles * Appendices Diagrams Sample Problem Specialized Usages Model Libraries Requirements Traceability ISO AP-233 Alignment XMI 11 Change Summary Changes from SysML v. 0.85 Specification consistently defined in terms of UML2 stereotypes most noticeable in Activities Refinement of Assembly semantics and notation Requirement defined as stereotype of class relationships clarified Complexity of Allocations reduced Refinement of Stereotype notation Interaction Overview diagrams no longer required Significant editing to improve readability and consistency 13 INCOSE International Workshop (29-30 Jan. 05) Recommendations INCOSE IW Recommendations Improve SysML tutorial emphasize Core diagrams and drive with Requirements diagrams replace UML-specific definitions with domain-specific explanations present update at INCOSE Symposium (MDSD plenary) Increase readability of SysML specification for engineers and tool vendors replace UML-specific definitions with domain-specific explanations include a domain metamodel Include a model library for Requirement taxonomy include MeasureOfEffectiveness (MOE; properties: weight, optimizationDirection) MOE may also include a complementary Parametric construct to effect MOE constraints 15 INCOSE IW Recommendations (cont’d) Include a model library for Assemblies that includes PhysicalAssembly (properties: supplier, modelNumber, serialNumber, lotNumber) Harmonize concepts, constructs, and usage examples for Allocations make implicit Allocations explicit test usability of multiple UI options via vendor prototypes Encourage and promote vendor SysML prototypes at INCOSE Symposium vendor exhibits 16 Submission Specifics Requirements (RFP sections 6.5-6.6) submission satisfies most mandatory requirements and many section 6.6 optional requirements summary provided in Appendix E Proof of concept (RFP section 4.8) in process of being validated by prototypes from multiple vendors Other verification & validation strict reuse of UML 2 Superstructure reviewed by INCOSE and AP-233 systems engineering experts reviewed by 28 SysML Partner organizations and their customers 17 Submission Specifics (cont’d) Copyrights and Trademarks BSD-style open source license currently 22 copyright holders 6 OMG Submitters; 7 non-OMG will update for final submission SysML and SysML logo not usable as trademarks OMG should consider rebranding (e.g., “OMG SysML”) Compliance Summarized in Section 2 Changes to OMG adopted specifications Revisions to UML 2 Superstructure Profiles will likely be required (see Technical Issues) 18 Technical Issues Vendor issues related to implementation and usability will be prioritized during prototype phase Changes to UML 2 Profiles will be required see Proposed Changes to UML 2 Stereotypes 19 Wrap Up Summary SysML v. 0.9 is a critical milestone vendor prototypes will provide valuable usability feedback SysML addresses UML for SE RFP requirements address additional requirements in v1.1 and 2.0 SysML extensively reuses and extends a relatively small subset of UML 2 Constructive recommendations from INCOSE IW feedback will be incorporated to improve specification OMG feedback is solicited regarding proposal in general, and Profiles proposal in particular Plan to present final revised submission in June 2005 21 Further Info SysML Forum www.SysML.org includes Feedback page SysML Forum discussion group mailto:[email protected] Chairs Cris Kobryn [email protected]; [email protected] Sandy Friedenthal [email protected]; [email protected] 22.