Overview of an Approach Describing Multi-views/ Multi-abstraction Levels Software Architecture

Ahmad Kheir, Hala Naja, Mourad Oussalah, Kifah Tout

Abstract

Views and abstraction levels are two major concepts introduced in the software engineering domain in order to enhance the architectural organization of complex systems’ requirements. Despite numerous and substantial works that built and refined those concepts, they still less secure and less standardized to be part of a rough software architecture. This paper begins with a survey of evolution of the role and usage of those concepts in software architecture, and ends with an overview of an approach integrating the views and abstraction levels concepts within a single rough multi-views/multi-abstraction levels software architecture and respecting their usage in an evolutionary architectural specification analysis. The main benefits of this contribution was to allow system architects to solve more efficiently the complexity problems; and allow them to build a complex, organized and coherent architecture; and finally enhance the communication and harmony among different stakeholders.

References

  1. Anwar, A., Dkaki, T., Ebersold, S., Coulette, B., and Nassar, M. (2011). A formal approach to model composition applied to VUML. In Engineering of Complex Computer Systems (ICECCS), 2011 16th IEEE International Conference on, page 188197.
  2. Anwar, A., Ebersold, S., Coulette, B., Nassar, M., and Kriouile, A. (2010). A rule-driven approach for composing viewpoint-oriented models. Journal of Object Technology, 9(2):89114.
  3. Clements, P., Bachmann, F., Bass, L., Garlan, D., Ivers, J., Little, R., Nord, R., and Stafford, J. (2002). A practical method for documenting software architectures.
  4. Delugach, H. S. (1990). Using conceptual graphs to analyze multiple views of software requirements.
  5. Dijkman, R. M., Quartel, D. A. C., and van Sinderen, M. J. (2008). Consistency in multi-viewpoint design of enterprise information systems. Information and Software Technology, 50(7):737752.
  6. Finkelstein, A. and Fuks, H. (1989). Multiparty specification. In ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes, volume 14, page 185195.
  7. Finkelstein, A. and Sommerville, I. (1996). The viewpoints FAQ. BCS/IEE Software Engineering Journal, 11(1):24.
  8. Group, I. A. W. (September 2000). Ieee recommended practice for architectural description of software-intensive systems. Technical report, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, NY, USA.
  9. Hilliard, R. (1999). Views and viewpoints in software systems architecture. In First Working IFIP Conference on Software Architecture,WICSA, pages 13-24.
  10. Kiczales, G., Lamping, J., Mendhekar, A., Maeda, C., Lopes, C., Loingtier, J., and Irwin, J. (1997). Aspect-oriented programming. In ECOOP'97ObjectOriented Programming, pages 220-242.
  11. Kramer, J. Abstraction in computer science $0 software engineering: A pedagogical perspective.
  12. Kruchten, P. (1995). The 4+ 1 view model of architecture. Software, IEEE, 12(6):42-50.
  13. Majumdar, D. and Swapan, B. (2010). Aspect Oriented Requirement Engineering: A Theme Based Vector Orientation Model. Journal of Computer Science, InfoComp, ?(?).
  14. May, N. (2005). A survey of software architecture viewpoint models. In Proceedings of the Sixth Australasian Workshop on Software and System Architectures, pages 13-24. Citeseer.
  15. Medvidovic, N., Taylor, R. N., and Whitehead Jr, E. J. (1996). Formal modeling of software architectures at multiple levels of abstraction. ejw, 714:8242776.
  16. Mili, H. and al (1999). View programming : Towards a framework for decentralized development and execution of oo programs. In Proc. of TOOLS USA' 99, pages 211-221. Prentice Hall.
  17. Mili, H., Sahraoui, H., Lounis, H., Mcheick, H., and Elkharraz, A. (2006). Concerned about separation. Fundamental Approaches to Software Engineering, pages 247-261.
  18. Mullery, G. P. (1979). CORE-a method for controlled requirement specification. In Proceedings of the 4th international conference on Software engineering, page 126135.
  19. Nassar, M. (2003). VUML: a viewpoint oriented UML extension. In Automated Software Engineering, 2003. Proceedings. 18th IEEE International Conference on, page 373376.
  20. Nassar, M., Anwar, A., Ebersold, S., Elasri, B., Coulette, B., and Kriouile, A. (2009). Code generation in VUML profile: A model driven approach. In Computer Systems and Applications, 2009. AICCSA 2009. IEEE/ACS International Conference on, page 412419.
  21. Nuseibeh, B., Kramer, J., and Finkelstein, A. (1994). A framework for expressing the relationships between multiple views in requirements specification. Software Engineering, IEEE Transactions on, 20(10):760773.
  22. Ossher, H. and al. (1995). Subject-oriented composition rules. In OOPSLAS'95, pages 235-250.
  23. Perry, D. and Wolf, A. (1992). Foundations for the study of software architecture. ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes, 17(4):40-52.
  24. Regnell, B., Andersson, M., and Bergstrand, J. (1996). A hierarchical use case model with graphical representation. In Engineering of Computer-Based Systems, 1996. Proceedings., IEEE Symposium and Workshop on, page 270?277.
  25. Robinson, W. N. (1990). Negotiation behavior during requirement specification. In Software Engineering, 1990. Proceedings., 12th International Conference on, page 268276.
  26. Rozanski, N. and Woods, E. (2011). Software Systems Architecture: Working with Stakeholders Using Viewpoints and Perspectives. Addison-Wesley.
  27. Sommerville, I. (2007). Software Engineering. International Computer Science Series. Addison-Wesley.
  28. Sommerville, I. and Sawyer, P. (1997). Viewpoints: principles, problems and a practical approach to requirements engineering. Annals of Software Engineering, 3(1):101130.
  29. Sowa, J. and Zachman, J. (1992). Extending and formalizing the framework for information systems architecture. IBM Systems Journal, 31(3):590-616.
Download


Paper Citation


in Harvard Style

Kheir A., Naja H., Oussalah M. and Tout K. (2013). Overview of an Approach Describing Multi-views/ Multi-abstraction Levels Software Architecture . In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Evaluation of Novel Approaches to Software Engineering - Volume 1: ENASE, ISBN 978-989-8565-62-4, pages 140-148. DOI: 10.5220/0004421001400148


in Bibtex Style

@conference{enase13,
author={Ahmad Kheir and Hala Naja and Mourad Oussalah and Kifah Tout},
title={Overview of an Approach Describing Multi-views/ Multi-abstraction Levels Software Architecture},
booktitle={Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Evaluation of Novel Approaches to Software Engineering - Volume 1: ENASE,},
year={2013},
pages={140-148},
publisher={SciTePress},
organization={INSTICC},
doi={10.5220/0004421001400148},
isbn={978-989-8565-62-4},
}


in EndNote Style

TY - CONF
JO - Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Evaluation of Novel Approaches to Software Engineering - Volume 1: ENASE,
TI - Overview of an Approach Describing Multi-views/ Multi-abstraction Levels Software Architecture
SN - 978-989-8565-62-4
AU - Kheir A.
AU - Naja H.
AU - Oussalah M.
AU - Tout K.
PY - 2013
SP - 140
EP - 148
DO - 10.5220/0004421001400148