SDMS Project Phase Ⅰ Duk-Jin Kim Tu Peng Yan Shi.
-
Upload
beverly-cooper -
Category
Documents
-
view
226 -
download
0
Transcript of SDMS Project Phase Ⅰ Duk-Jin Kim Tu Peng Yan Shi.
SDMS Project PhaseⅠ
Duk-Jin KimTu PengYan Shi
Agenda
Introduction Why?-Enterprise Requirements What?-System Functional Requirements How?-System Non-Functional Requirements Prototype Next step
Introduction
Process
ROLES
Understandproblem
Establishoutline
requirements
Selectprototyping
system
Developprototype
Evaluateprototype
ACTIONS
Req. engineerDomain expert
End-user
Req. engineerEnd-user
Softwareengineer
Project manager
Req. engineerSoftwareengineer
End-userDomain expertReq. engineer
Software engineer
for prototypingfor prototyping [Kotonya&Sommerville98]
All three members in our team play the following roles: Requirement Engineers Project Managers Software Engineers Domain Experts End Users
Introduction
Roles
Enterprise Req.
Real World Problems
Communication Complexity Schedule Meeting Date Complexity Schedule Meeting Location
Complexity Time Consuming Job Conflict Between Date and Location
Enterprise Req.
Existing System
www.meetingwizard.com Communication Overhead No Automation in Scheduling Date Internet-Dependent System
Enterprise Req.
System Goal
Provide Communication Solution Provide Automated Scheduling
Enterprise Req.
Preliminary Understanding
Any related system? User roles?
e.g. Active, important,.. Location and date conflict? Any unstated problem?
e.g Cancellation,.. Development cost?
Enterprise Req.
Issues
Enterprise Req.
Improved Understanding
Stakeholders
Enterprise Req.
Improved Understanding
FRs & NFRs - Setting Date
Enterprise Req.
Improved Understanding
FRs & NFRs - Setting Location
Enterprise Req.
Improved Understanding
FRs & NFRs - Canceling Meeting
Date conflict Opt1: extends the date range Opt2: remove some dates from the
exclusion set Opt3: remove some participants Opt4: add new date to the preference
set.
Enterprise Req.
Conflict
Location conflict Opt1: Preferred by many participants.
e.g over 70% of participants.. Opt2: Preferred by many important
participants. Opt3: Initiator’s choice
Enterprise Req.
Conflict(cont.)
Location and Date conflict Opt1: Initiator’s choice
Enterprise Req.
Conflict(cont.)
System Functional Req.
Preliminary Understanding
Monitor Meeting
Plan Meeting
Re-plan Meeting
Conflict Resolution
Interaction Management
Exclusion Set Modification
Preference set Modification
Preferred Location Modification
External Constraints Changes
Bounds on Re-planning
Resolution Policies
SDMS
Clients
Communicate Requests
Get Replies from Participants
Inform Participants about schedules&changes
operation information stakeholder
include
depend on
Is the system available to everyone? Does every user play the same role? Solution: Add a Login/Logoff module to set the
users’ authorization level. Users with different authorization level have different constraints to using the system. How to monitor meetings ?
System Functional Req.
Issues
How to monitor meetings is not mentioned in the functional requirement. Option 1: When having a virtual meeting in a
distributed manner, every participant should have his/her status, for example, giving presentation, online/offline, etc, displayed publicly so that every participant can see it.
Option 2: Since this requirement is ambiguous, we can just consider it as not part of the system’s core functions and dispose it.
Solution: Option 1 Reason: Enhance the functionality of the
system.
System Functional Req.
Issues
What kind of constraints expressed by participants should the meeting initiator consider? How to derive these constraints? Option 1: Design a sub-module within the
meeting plan module to derive all kinds of constraints from participants.
Option 2: Get the exclusion set and preference set from the interaction management module and use them as constraints.
Solution: Option 2. Reason: Decrease the redundancy of the
system, and exclusion set and preference set are enough for the initial planning of a meeting.
System Functional Req.
Issues
System Functional Req.
Issues
What does the “Client” refer to in the statement “Support conflict resolution according to resolution policies stated by the client.”? Option 1: system administrator Option 2: meeting initiator Solution: Both Option 1 and Option 2 Reason: System administrator should have the
predominate decisions on resolution policies. In the meantime, meeting initiator’s opinion also weighs.
System Functional Req.
Improved Understanding
Monitor Meeting
Plan Meeting
Re-plan Meeting
Conflict Resolution
Interaction Management
Exclusion Set Modification
Preference set Modification
Preferred Location Modification
External Constraints Changes
Bounds on Re-planning
Resolution Policies
SDMS
Initiator
Communicate Requests
Get Replies from Participants
Inform Participants about schedules&changes
operation information stakeholder
include
depend on
Exclusion Set
Preference Set
Admini-strator
Login/Logoff
User Authorization
level
Display Participant’s
status publicly
System Non-Functional Req.
Preliminary and Improved
System Non-Functional Req.
Issues
ambiguity What is typical ways of managing meeting is
very unclear. What does “monitor meeting” mean is unclear. Dynamically and flexibilities also are unclear.
omission Can’t understand “explicit”
other accurately and nomadcity are controversial .
System Non-Functional Req.
Priority of the NFRs
1 Manage 1 Replanning 1 Reuse 2 Variation 2 Requesting 2 Determinate 2 Communication 2 Communicate via Internet 2 Privacy 3 Monitor 3 Handle
Demo Mock Up.
Login
Demo Mock Up.
New Meeting
Demo Mock Up.
Propose Date
Demo Mock Up.
Important Notice
All examples come from www.meetingwizard.com. Actually system may be different.
Next Step
Further improvement of ER & SR Developing the prototype
Thank You!
Duck-Jin KimTu PengYan Shi
Sep 2006