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