DOCSLIB.ORG

Reference Model for the ORCHESTRA Architecture (RM-OA) V2

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Reference Model for the ORCHESTRA Architecture (RM-OA) V2 Open Geospatial Consortium Inc. Date: 2007-7-10 Reference number of this OGC® project document: OGC 07-024 Version: 2.0 Category: OGC® Discussion Paper Editor: Thomas Usländer (Ed.) Reference Model for the ORCHESTRA Architecture (RM-OA) V2 Copyright notice See Copyright statement on next page To obtain additional rights of use, visit http://www.opengeospatial.org/legal/. Warning This document is not an OGC Standard. This document is an OGC Discussion Paper and is therefore not an official position of the OGC membership. It is distributed for review and comment. It is subject to change without notice and may not be referred to as an OGC Standard. Further, an OGC Discussion Paper should not be referenced as required or mandatory technology in procurements. Document type: OGC® Discussion Paper Document subtype: OGC Document stage: Draft Document language: English Copyright © 2007, ORCHESTRA Consortium The ORCHESTRA Consortium (http://www.eu-orchestra.org/contact.shtml) grants third parties the right to use and distribute all or parts of this document, provided that the ORCHESTRA project and the document are properly referenced. THIS DOCUMENT IS PROVIDED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND CONTRIBUTORS "AS IS" AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE COPYRIGHT OWNER OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE OF THIS DOCUMENT, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE. Preamble to the "Reference Model for the Orchestra Architecture (RM-OA)" This document specifies the Reference Model for the ORCHESTRA Architecture (RM-OA). It is an extension of the OGC Reference Model and contains a specification framework for the design of geospatial service-oriented architectures and service networks. The RM-OA comprises the generic aspects of service-oriented architectures, i.e., those aspects that are independent of the risk management domain and thus applicable to other application domains. The ORCHESTRA Architecture is a platform-neutral (abstract) specification of the informational and functional aspects of service networks taking into account and evolving out of architectural standards and service specifications of ISO, OGC, W3C and OASIS. The target audience of the RM-OA comprise system architects, information modellers and system developers. The present V2 of the RM-OA extends V1 (OGC 05-107) in the following points: - inclusion of service meta-modelling into the ORCHESTRA Meta-model leading to a coherent meta-model for feature, interface and service types as an extension of the General Feature Model - update and refinement of the service descriptions - preliminary specification of the engineering and technology viewpoint - conceptual meta-information model (annex A3) - rules for the specification of meta-information models (annex B1) For the ORCHESTRA abstract service specifications see http://www.eu-orchestra.org . FP6-511678 ORCHESTRA Open Architecture and Spatial Data Infrastructure for Risk Management Integrated Project Priority 2.3.2.9 Improving Risk Management Reference Model for the ORCHESTRA Architecture (RM-OA) Deliverable D3.2.3 RM-OA Version 2 Date: 2007-01-31 Revision: 2.0 Start date of the ORCHESTRA project: 2004-09-01 Duration of the ORCHESTRA project: 3 years Organisation name of lead contractor for this deliverable: Fraunhofer IITB Reference Model for the ORCHESTRA Architecture (RM-OA) Rev. 2.0 Document Control Page Title Reference Model for the ORCHESTRA Architecture (RM-OA) D3.2.3: RM-OA Version 2 (Rev. 2.0) Creator Thomas Usländer, Fraunhofer IITB (Ed.) e-mail: [email protected] Subject ORCHESTRA Architecture Design Description This document specifies the Reference Model for the ORCHESTRA Architecture (RM-OA). It contains a platform-neutral specification of the ORCHESTRA Architecture and a specification framework for the design of ORCHESTRA-compliant service networks across all viewpoints. Publisher ORCHESTRA consortium Contributor Bernard, Lars Joint Research Centre - IES Bügel, Ulrich Fraunhofer IITB Corabœuf, Damien BRGM Cooper, Michael ETH Zürich Denzer, Ralf Environmental Informatics Group Dihé, Pascal Environmental Informatics Group Ecker, Severin ARC Seibersdorf Research Fischer, Julian Environmental Informatics Group Friis-Christensen, Anders Joint Research Centre - IES Frysinger, Steve Environmental Informatics Group Goodwin, John Ordnance Survey Güttler, Reiner Environmental Informatics Group Havlik, Denis ARC Seibersdorf Research Hilbring, Désirée Fraunhofer IITB Hofmann, Thomas Environmental Informatics Group Holt, Ian Ordnance Survey Humer, Heinrich ARC Seibersdorf Research Iosifescu Enescu, Ionut ETH Zürich Kunz, Wolfgang Environmental Informatics Group Kutschera, Peter ARC Seibersdorf Research Lorenzo, José Atos Origin Spain Lutz, Michael Joint Research Centre - IES Ma, Wenjie Environmental Informatics Group Pichler, Guenther Open Geospatial Consortium Europe Portele, Clemens Open Geospatial Consortium Europe Robida, Francois BRGM Schimak, Gerald ARC Seibersdorf Research Schlobinski, Sascha Environmental Informatics Group Schmieder, Martin Fraunhofer IITB Serrano, Jean-Jacques BRGM Sykora, Peter ETH Zürich Usländer, Thomas Fraunhofer IITB © 2007 ORCHESTRA Consortium (IST Integrated Project 511678) 2/190 Reference Model for the ORCHESTRA Architecture (RM-OA) Rev. 2.0 Date 2007-01-31 Type Text Format application/msword Identifier ORCHESTRA Portal: SP3 / SP3 Quality Assurance / 09: D3.2.3 / 06: D3.2.3 RM-OA V2 (2.0) – published version Source Not applicable Language en-GB. Relation none Coverage Not applicable Rights © 2007 ORCHESTRA Consortium The ORCHESTRA project is an Integrated Project (FP6-511678) funded under the FP6 (Sixth Framework Programme) of the European Commission in the research programme Information Society Technologies (IST). Deliverable number D3.2.3 Audience public restricted internal © 2007 ORCHESTRA Consortium (IST Integrated Project 511678) 3/190 Reference Model for the ORCHESTRA Architecture (RM-OA) Rev. 2.0 Revision History Revision Date Sections Description Changed 1.0 2004-12-23 all Final draft of D3.2.1 submitted to the QA process 1.1 2005-01-26 Official Inclusion of QA comments by SP3 leader on V1.0 sections of Renaming of user roles D3.2.1 1.2 2005-02-04 Official Resolution of open points sections of Harmonisation of terms D3.2.1 1.3 2005-02-16 Official Results of WP3.2 meeting on 2005-02-09 sections of D3.2.1 1.4 2005-03-24 Official Inclusion of QA comments by SP3 leader on V1.3, sections of results of discussion within SP3 D3.2.1 1.5 2005-04-22 Sections 5.3 Inclusion of QA comments by SP3 leader on V1.3, and 5.4 results of discussion within SP3 1.6 2005-06-28 all Change of Information and Service Viewpoint description according to discussions within SP3 1.7 2005-07-13 all Inclusion of partner contributions to Information and Service Viewpoint description and results of discussions within SP3 Move of sections 5.3 and 5.4 to an annex 1.7 2005-07-14 all QA by SP3 leader 1.8 2005-07-22 all Update following QA review by SP3 leader 1.9 2005-09-15 all Update following technical review by the Technical Supervisor 1.10 2005-10-14 all editorial corrections, update following the ORCHESTRA Annual Technical Review 1.11/1.12 2006-07-21 all Major update incorporating the progress, the refinements and the agreements between October 2006-08-04 2005 and July 2006 of the ORCHESTRA sub-project 3 List of major changes: • update of the references • new and adapted glossary terms (section 4), e.g. for meta-information, semantics, UAA, service and service type, platform • extended understanding of the engineering viewpoint: inclusion of service characteristics • new and refined design decisions (section 7) - extension of functional domains - OMM partition into information and service part - revision of UAA approach - consideration of meta-information © 2007 ORCHESTRA Consortium (IST Integrated Project 511678) 4/190 Reference Model for the ORCHESTRA Architecture (RM-OA) Rev. 2.0 - revision of source system integration process - identification of resources • Information Viewpoint (section 8) - removal of source system descriptor - no specific handling of coverages - addition of data types • Service Viewpoint (section 9) - inclusion of service meta-model (OMM- Service) - adapted list of OA/OT Services - update of service description framework - adaptation of nearly all service descriptions • Technology Viewpoint (section 10) - guidelines for the specification of a platform • Engineering Viewpoint (section 11) - description of OSN characteristics - section on identification of OSIs and feature instances • Revision of RM-OA Annex structure 1.13 2006-09-19 all • updated glossary terms: spatial data infrastructure • update of section 6.2.2.2 “Requirements of the INSPIRE Relationship” • new section 7.2 “The ORCHESTRA Meta-model Approach” • update of the OMM-Service • update of sections about UAA • new section 12.2 “Evolution of the RM-OA” • update of a series of minor architectural decisions taken during the SP3 discussion process • extension of Table 7 to include the relationship
Load more

Recommended publications
  • AS ISO 10006-2003 Quality Management Systems-Guidelines for Quality Management in Projects
    AS ISO 10006—2003 ISO 10006:2003 AS ISO 10006 Australian Standard™ Quality management systems— Guidelines for quality management in projects This is a free 7 page sample. Access the full version online. This Australian Standard was prepared by Committee QR-008, Quality Systems. It was approved on behalf of the Council of Standards Australia on 3 September 2003 and published on 10 November 2003. The following are represented on Committee QR-008: Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry Australian Industry Group Australian Information Industry Association Australian Organisation for Quality Bureau of Steel Manufacturers of Australia Certification Bodies (Australia) Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (Commonwealth) Department of Defence (Australia) Department of Industry Science and Resources (Commonwealth) Institution of Engineers Australia Main Roads Department, Queensland Master Builders Australia Quality Society of Australasia Royal Australian Chemical Institute Keeping Standards up-to-date Standards are living documents which reflect progress in science, technology and systems. To maintain their currency, all Standards are periodically reviewed, and This is a free 7 page sample. Access the full version online. new editions are published. Between editions, amendments may be issued. Standards may also be withdrawn. It is important that readers assure themselves they are using a current Standard, which should include any amendments which may have been published since the Standard was purchased. Detailed information about Standards can be found by visiting the Standards Australia web site at www.standards.com.au and looking up the relevant Standard in the on-line catalogue. Alternatively, the printed Catalogue provides information current at 1 January each year, and the monthly magazine, The Global Standard, has a full listing of revisions and amendments published each month.
    [Show full text]
  • Quality Management ISO Audit & Performance Systems Instructor: Jurandir Primo, PE
    PDHonline Course M482 (5 PDH) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quality Management ISO Audit & Performance Systems Instructor: Jurandir Primo, PE 2012 PDH Online | PDH Center 5272 Meadow Estates Drive Fairfax, VA 22030-6658 Phone & Fax: 703-988-0088 www.PDHonline.org www.PDHcenter.com An Approved Continuing Education Provider www.PDHcenter.com PDH Course M482 www.PDHonline.org Contents: I. BASIC QUALITY CONCEPTS V. PERFORMANCE SYSTEMS 1. Total Quality Management (TQM) 1. Six Sigma 1.1. Total Quality Management Evolution 2. The Five W´s and One H 2. Quality Management System (QMS) 2.1. Five W´s and One H Applied to Six Sigma 2.1. TQM and QMS Relationship 3. Ishikawa Diagrams 2.2. Quality Gurus Main Contribution 4. The 6 M´s Used by Toyota 2.3. The Plan-Do-Study-Act Cycles (PDSA) 5. Control Charts 2.4. TQM Failures 5.1. Control Charts Definition 3. Quality Assurance (QA) 6. Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA) 3.1. Components of QA Program 6.1. Critical Analysis - FMECA 4. Quality Control in Civil Construction 6.2. FMEA Terminology 4.1. Quality in Electrical Services 7. Risk Levels 4.2. Civil, Mechanical and Electrical Relations 8. Statistical Quality Control (SQC) 8.1. The Mean II. ISO 9000 BASIC STANDARDS 9. Histograms 10. Pareto Analysis 1. ISO Quality Management Systems 11. Root Cause Analysis (RCA) 1.1. ISO 9000 Latest Revision 12. 5S – Work Area Organization 1.2. ISO 9000 Audit 13. Design of Experiments (DOE) 1.3. Non-conformance Report 14. Quality Function Deployment (QFD) 15. Production Planning and Control (PPC) III. ISO 10000 MAIN GUIDELINES SERIES 15.1.
    [Show full text]
  • International Standards, Approaches and Frameworks Relevant to Software Quality Management and Software Process Improvement
    International standards, approaches and frameworks relevant to Software Quality Management and Software Process Improvement To help organizations managing software quality and improving software processes several standards, models, approaches and frameworks have been developed during the last decades. The most widely known and recognized of them are presented in this document. • Capability Maturity Model (CMM) • CMM Integration (CMMI) • Personal Software Process (PSP) and Team Software Process (TSP) • ISO 9000 standards family • TickIT • ISO/IEC TR 15504 Information Technology - Software Process Assessment (SPICE) • ISO/IEC 12207 Information Technology - Software Life-Cycle Processes • BOOSTRAP • Rational Unified Process CMM Publication Date: Version 1.1 - February 1993 Description: The Capability Maturity Model for Software (SW-CMM or CMM) is a model used by organizations for appraising the maturity of their software processes and for identifying practices that will increase the maturity of those processes. It was developed by the Software Engineering Institute, in cooperation with industry representatives. The Software CMM has become a de facto standard for assessing and improving software processes. Through the SW-CMM, the SEI and community have put in place an effective means for modeling, defining, and measuring the maturity of the processes used by software professionals. The Capability Maturity Model for Software describes the principles and practices underlying software process maturity and is intended to help software organizations
    [Show full text]
  • A Stone Man Version
    Guide to the Software Engineering Body of Knowledge AA SSttoonnee MMaann Veerrssiioonn (Version 0.7) April 2000 A project of the Software Engineering Coordinating Committee (Joint IEEE Computer Society - ACM committee ) Corporate support by: Project managed by: Executive Editors: Alain Abran, Université du Québec à Montréal James W. Moore, The MITRE Corp. Editors: Pierre Bourque, Université du Québec à Montréal Robert Dupuis, Université du Québec à Montréal Chair of the Software Engineering Coordinating Committee Leonard L. Tripp, IEEE Computer Society Copyright © 2000, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. All rights reserved. PREFACE TO THE SWEBOK GUIDE 1. Software engineering is an emerging discipline but there are unmistakable trends indicating an 10. Purpose increasing level of maturity: 11. The purpose of this Guide is to provide a 2. w McMaster University (Canada), the consensually-validated characterization of the Rochester Institute of Technology (US), the bounds of the software engineering discipline University of Sheffield (UK), the and to provide a topical access to the Body of University of New South Wales (Australia) Knowledge supporting that discipline. The Body and other universities around the world now of Knowledge is subdivided into ten Knowledge offer undergraduate degrees in software Areas (KA) and the descriptions of the KAs are engineering. designed to discriminate among the various important concepts, permitting readers to find 3. w The Software Capability Maturity Model and ISO 9000 are used to certify their way quickly to subjects of interest. Upon organizational capability for software finding a subject, readers are referred to key engineering. papers or book chapters selected because they succinctly present the knowledge.
    [Show full text]
  • Guide to the Software Engineering Body of Knowledge
    Guide to the Software Engineering Body of Knowledge AA SSttoonnee MMaann VVeerrssiioonn (Version 0.5) October 1999 A project of the Software Engineering Coordinating Committee (Joint IEEE Computer Society - ACM committee ) Corporate support by: Project managed by: Co-Executive Editors: Alain Abran, Université du Québec à Montréal James W. Moore, The MITRE Corp. Editors: Pierre Bourque, Université du Québec à Montréal Robert Dupuis, Université du Québec à Montréal Project Champion: Leonard L. Tripp, IEEE Computer Society Table of Contents INTRODUCTORY TEXT FROM THE EDITORIAL TEAM KNOWLEDGE AREA DESCRIPTION : - Software Configuration Management - Software Construction - Software Design - Software Engineering Infrastructure - Software Engineering Management - Software Engineering Process - Software Evolution and Maintenance - Software Quality Analysis - Software Requirement Analysis - Software Testing APPENDIX A KNOWLEDGE AREA DESCRIPTION SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE STONE MAN VERSION OF THE GUIDE TO THE SOFTWARE ENGINEERING BODY OF KNOWLEDGE – VERSION 0.25 INTRODUCTORY TEXT FROM THE EDITORIAL TEAM The IEEE Computer Society and the Association for Computing Machinery are working on a joint project to develop a guide to the Software Engineering Body Of Knowledge (SWEBOK). This is the current draft (version 0.5 completed in September 1999) of the Stoneman version of the Guide1. Articulating a body of knowledge is an essential step toward developing a profession because it represents a broad consensus regarding the contents of the discipline. Without such a consensus, there is no way to validate a licensing examination, set a curriculum to prepare individuals for the examination, or formulate criteria for accrediting the curriculum. The project team is currently working on an update to this draft version of the Guide based on the results of the second review cycle.
    [Show full text]
  • Voluntary Voting System Guidelines VVSG 2.0 Recommendations for Requirements for the Voluntary Voting System Guidelines 2.0
    Voluntary Voting System Guidelines VVSG 2.0 Recommendations for Requirements for the Voluntary Voting System Guidelines 2.0 February 29, 202010, 2021 Prepared for the Election Assistance Commission At the direction of the Technical Guidelines Development Committee 1 Acknowledgements Chair of the TGDC: Dr. Walter G. Copan Director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Gaithersburg, MD Representing the EAC Standards Board: Robert Giles Paul Lux Director Supervisor of Elections New Jersey Division of Elections Okaloosa County Trenton, NJ Crestview, FL Representing the EAC Board of Advisors: Neal Kelley Linda Lamone Registrar of Voters Administrator of Elections Orange County Maryland State Board of Orange County, CA ElectionElections Annapolis, MD Representing the Architectural and Transportation Barrier, and Compliance Board (Access Board): Marc Guthrie Sachin Pavithran Public Board Member Public Board Member Newark, OH Logan, UT Representing the American National Standards Institute (ANSI): Mary Saunders Vice President, Government Relations & Public Policy American National Standards Institute Washington, DC Representing the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers: Dan Wallach Professor, Electrical & Engineering Computer Science Rice University Houston, TX Representing the National Association of State Election Directors (NASED): Lori Augino Judd Choate Washington State Director of Elections State Elections Director Washington Secretary of State Colorado Secretary of State Olympia, WA Denver, CO 2 Requirements
    [Show full text]
  • Innovations Well Done 20 Years of Innovations
    INNOVATIONS WELL DONE 20 YEARS OF INNOVATIONS CELEBRATE CHECK OUT OUR 20TH ANNIVERSARY CAMPAIGN CONTENT 05 33 55 79 EDITORIAL INTERVIEW PORTFOLIO SOCIAL WITH CSMO RESPONSIBILITY 07 35 67 85 COMPANY PROFILE SERVICES INNOVATIONS HUMAN RESOURCES 09 37 71 87 WHY US? CUSTOM SOFTWARE INTEGRATED ENVIRONMENT SOLUTIONS MANAGEMENT SYSTEM Page Page 3 13 39 73 89 4 Page Page MANAGEMENT MOBILE AND WEB PARTNERSHIPS & FINANCE APPLICATIONS MEMBERSHIPS 25 41 75 93 TIMELINE NEARSHORE TECHNOLOGIES SECURITY OUTSOURCING 29 45 76 95 INTERVIEW REFERENCES SCIENCE AND CONTACT WITH COO RESEARCH 31 53 77 INTERVIEW CLIENTS MARKETING WITH CTO EDITORIAL “2019 WAS A VERY SUCCESSFUL YEAR FOR QBSW, THAT IS WHY WE ENTERED THE NEW YEAR 2019 was a very successful year for implementing online communication During the year, we managed to acquire QBSW. We reached record turnover, with our clients and partners. several new customers—one from Austria we had a large number of contracted Thankfully, we were already familiar with and others from the Slovak banking WITH EQUALLY projects, and our number of employees communicating online with our foreign and finance sector. We have launched was the highest in company history. clients, and we already had systems a marketing campaign aimed at foreign Page 5 OPTIMISTIC We entered the new year with equally in place for remote communication markets, and we are also communicating 6 Page Page optimistic expectations. It was a perfect within teams (as three of our teams are intensively with chambers of commerce year to celebrate QBSW’s twentieth located outside of Bratislava). and other partners while searching for EXPECTATIONS ” anniversary.
    [Show full text]
  • Comparative Analysis of the ISO 10006:2003 Against Other Standards and Guidelines Related to Software Project Management
    Comparative Analysis of the ISO 10006:2003 against other Standards and Guidelines related to Software Project Management Brenda L. Flores-Rios1, Oscar M. Rodríguez-Elias2, Martín Olguín-Espinoza1 1Universidad Autónoma de Baja California, 2Instituto Tecnológico de Hermosillo 1{bflores | molguin}@uabc.mx, [email protected] Abstract. Nowadays, the Project Management field is in a stage in which its processes and concepts are being normalized and harmonized. The standard ISO 10006:2003 is an example of it. The goal of this standard is to provide an orientation about the concepts, elements, and guidelines for the quality of Project Management practices through eleven processes. This paper presents a comparison of the processes defined in the ISO 10006 with those defined in the PMBOK of PMI, ICB of IPMA, SWEBOK and the Mexican Standard NMX-I- 059-NYCE-2005. The purpose of this work is to describe a conceptual framework to be taken into account in project management initiatives for software processes, which can be used by software project managers. 1 Introduction The need of having highly motivated and prepared personnel in software development processes has been discussed since the sixties [1]. Today, despite that the software industry considers itself as a solid industry, and although most of the software projects are developed by highly specialized people, surprisingly, this is an industry characterized by not having highly quality products and services [2]. Software quality implies the necessity of accomplishing some parameters to allow establish the minimal levels by which a product can be considered a quality product [3]. Reports and statistical analysis have been performed to determine the status of software projects, for instance the project European Software Process Improvement Training Initiative (ESPITI), and Extreme Chaos of the Standish Group.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix A: Quality Models and Verification Methods
    Appendix A: Quality Models and Verification Methods As indicated in previous chapters, we have excluded discussions on the various verification methods which still exist in many publications. The following table may be useful in researching appropriate methods to deal with the different artefacts in the product lifecycle. We do not claim completeness in the methods but have provided common verification methods which we apply in our projects. Artefact type Quality model Verification methods Documentation DocQMod • Peer Review • Structured Group Review • Inspection • Walk Through • Technical Review • Informal Review Business BPQMod • Peer Review processes • Structured Group Review • Formal Inspection (on business process models, e.g. swimlanes, business and application process models) • Walk Through • GUI Prototyping • Test Modelling (based on business processes) • Early Test Case Design • Usability Testing Requirements ReqQMod • Management Review • Peer Review • Structured Group Review • Audit • Inspection • Walk Through • Technical Review • Informal review • GUI Prototyping • Test Modelling (based on requirements) • Test Case Specification (based on requirements) (continued) M. Wieczorek et al., Systems and Software Quality, 165 DOI 10.1007/978-3-642-39971-8, © Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014 166 Appendix A: Quality Models and Verification Methods Artefact type Quality model Verification methods Architecture ArchQMod • Peer Review • Structured Group Review • Formal Inspection • ATAM • Prototyping (including functional and non-functional testing) • FMEA Database DataQMod • Formal Inspection (on e.g. normalisation) • Peer Review (on indexing, SQL statements, stored procedures) • Structured Group Review • Functional Testing (by application) • Non-functional testing (including performance and security) Source code CodeQMod • Peer Review • Walk Through • Formal Inspection (e.g. style guides, coding standards) • Static Source Code Analysis (tool based) • Profiling (e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix G Systems General Requirements
    BROADWAY SUBWAY PROJECT Commercial in Confidence PROJECT AGREEMENT EXECUTION COPY SCHEDULE 4 Appendix G Systems General Requirements BROADWAY SUBWAY PROJECT Commercial in Confidence PROJECT AGREEMENT EXECUTION COPY SCHEDULE 4: APPENDIX G: SYSTEM GENERAL REQUIREMENTS - 2 - Table of Contents 1 APPENDIX G – Systems GENERAL REQUIREMENTS .................................................................. 7 1.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 7 1.2 Requirements Delivery ........................................................................................................................ 7 1.3 Standards .............................................................................................................................................. 8 1.4 Systems Plan ........................................................................................................................................ 8 1.5 Design Life of the Systems .................................................................................................................. 9 1.6 Systems Design Management .............................................................................................................. 9 1.6.1 Requirements Specification Overview ............................................................................................ 10 1.6.2 Requirements Analysis Overview ..................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Evolution of Software Configuration Management
    ISSN 2278-3091 Syahrul Fahmy et al., International Journal of AdvancedVolume Trends 9, No.1. in Computer3, 2020 Science and Engineering, 9(1.3), 2020, 50 - 63 International Journal of Advanced Trends in Computer Science and Engineering Available Online at http://www.warse.org/IJATCSE/static/pdf/file/ijatcse0891.32020.pdf https://doi.org/10.30534/ijatcse/2020/0891.32020 The Evolution of Software Configuration Management 1 2 3 1 1 Syahrul Fahmy , Aziz Deraman , Jamaiah Yahaya , Akhyari Nasir , Nooraida Shamsudin 1University CollegeTATI, Malaysia, [email protected] 2Universiti Malaysia Terengganu, Malaysia 3Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Malaysia processing and implementation status, and verify compliance ABSTRACT with specified requirements” [3]. Software Configuration Management (SCM) is a discipline in “a management activity that applies technical and software engineering for managing changes to software administrative direction over the life cycle of a product, its products using standard processes and tools. This article configuration items, and related product configuration presents the evolution of SCM since its inception, information. It provides identification and traceability, the highlighting the components, application to other areas, status of achievement, and access to accurate information in change management and software quality. Research and all phases of the life cycle” [4]. development in SCM are highly motivated by the problems at hand in software development. SCM process and activities are This paper presents the evolution of SCM, discussing its sound, guided by international standards and industry best components, application to other areas, change management practice. Commercial and proprietary tools are aplenty, and and software quality. the underlying techniques are no longer confined to SCM.
    [Show full text]
  • Manual on the Quality Management System for Aeronautical Information Services ______
    Doc 9839 AN/xxx Manual on the Quality Management System for Aeronautical Information Services ________________________________ Approved by the Secretary General and published under his authority First Edition — XXXX International Civil Aviation Organization Published in English, .................... by the INTERNATIONAL CIVIL AVIATION ORGANIZATION 999 University Street, Montréal, Quebec, Canada H3C 5H7 For ordering information and for a complete listing of sales agents and booksellers, please go to the ICAO website at www.icao.int Doc 9839, Manual on the Quality Management System for Aeronautical Information Services Order Number: ISBN © ICAO 2010 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, without prior permission in writing from the International Civil Aviation Organization. AMENDMENTS Amendments are announced in the supplements to the Catalogue of ICAO Publications; the Catalogue and its supplements are available on the ICAO website at www.icao.int. The space below is provided to keep a record of such amendments. RECORD OF AMENDMENTS AND CORRIGENDA AMENDMENTS CORRIGENDA No. Date Entered by No. Date Entered by TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Foreword .......................................................................................................................................................... (vii) Acronyms ........................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]