Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

A Lightweight State Machine for Validating Use Case Descriptions

By J.M. Kanyaru and Keith T. Phalp

Abstract

This paper presents a tool to provide an enaction\ud capability for use case descriptions. Use cases have\ud wide industry acceptance and are well suited for\ud constructing initial approximations of the intended\ud behaviour. However, use case descriptions are still\ud relatively immature with respect to precise syntax\ud and semantics. Hence, despite promising work on\ud providing writing guidelines, rigorous validation of\ud use case descriptions requires further support.\ud One approach to supporting validation is to use\ud enaction. Indeed, enactable models have been used\ud extensively within process modelling to clarify\ud understanding of descriptions.\ud Given the importance of requirements validation,\ud such automated support promises significant benefits.\ud However, the need to produce formal descriptions, to\ud drive enaction, is often seen as a barrier to the takeup\ud of such technologies. That is, developers have\ud traditionally been reluctant to increase the\ud proportion of effort devoted to requirements\ud activities. Our approach involves the development of\ud a lightweight state-machine, which obviates any need\ud to create intermediate formal descriptions, thereby\ud maintaining the simple nature of the use case\ud description.\ud Hence, this 'lightweight' approach, which provides\ud an enaction capability ‘for minimal effort’, increases\ud the likelihood of industrial take-up

Topics: csi, ge
Publisher: ESERG
Year: 2004
OAI identifier: oai:eprints.bournemouth.ac.uk:11354

Suggested articles

Citations

  1. (2002). A Graphically Based Language for Constructing, Executing and Analysing Models of Software Systems. doi
  2. (1998). APPLYING USE CASES: A Practical Guide.
  3. (2004). C.Bossen, Executable Use Cases: Requirements for a Pervasive Health Care System. doi
  4. (1995). Decentralised process enactment in a multi-perspective development environment. doi
  5. (2003). For Dummies.
  6. (1998). Guiding The Construction of Textual Use Case Specifications. doi
  7. (2002). Heuristics for Use Case Descriptions, PhD Thesis,
  8. (2000). Improving the Quality of Requirements with Scenarios. doi
  9. (2002). Modelling Language Specification version 1.5.
  10. (2001). Problem Frames: Analyzing and structuring software development problems. doi
  11. (1998). RolEnact: role-based enactable models of business processes. doi
  12. (2001). Software engineering: theory and practice. 2nd edition ed.
  13. (2002). Supporting Communicability with Use Case Guidelines: An Empirical Study.
  14. (2003). Synthesis of Behavioural Models from Scenarios. doi
  15. (2002). The Play-in/Play-out Approach and Tool: Specifying and Executing Behavioral Requirements. The Israeli workshop on programming languages and Development Environments; doi
  16. (2000). Use Cases:Requirements in Context. doi
  17. (1993). Use of Domain Knowledge for Requirements Validation. doi
  18. Using Enactable Models to Enhance Use Case Descriptions, doi
  19. (2000). Using UML:Software Engineering with objects and components.
  20. (2001). Writing effective Use cases. doi

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.