Advertisement

User interfaces supporting the software process

  • Hans-Ulrich Kobialka
  • Claus Lewerentz
Section 2. Research Papers
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1487)

Abstract

User interfaces determine the process support that is really delivered to the user. In order to support a process effectively, individually tailored user interfaces have to be provided. Most process centered software engineering environments (PSEEs) provide predefined user interfaces, but only low-level languages which can be used by customers to build process-specific user interfaces.

This paper describes how user interfaces can be specified in the ADDD PSEE, and how these interfaces support the user during process enactment.

Keywords

User Interface Process Enactment Process Support User Inter General User Interface 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [Band94]
    Sergio Bandinelli, Elisabetta Di Nitto, Alfonso Fuggetta, and Luigi Lavazza. “Coupled vs. decoupled user interaction environments in PSEEs.” In C. Ghezzi, editor, Proceedings of the 9th International Software Process Workshop, pages 50–52. IEEE Computer Society Press, October 1994.Google Scholar
  2. [Band96]
    Sergio Bandinelli, Elisabetta Di Nitto, and Alfonso Fuggetta. “Supporting cooperation in the SPADE-1 environment.” IEEE Transactions on Sofrivare Engineering, 22(12):841–865, December 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [BS95]
    Israel Ben-Shaul and Gail Kaiser. A Paradigm for Decentralized Process Modeling. Kluwer, 1995.Google Scholar
  4. [Dami98]
    Samir Dami, Jacky Estublier, and Mahfoud Amiour. “APEL: A graphical yet executable formalism for process modeling.” Automated Software Engineering, 5(1):61–96, January 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [Daya91]
    Umeshwar Dayal, Meichun Hsu, and Rivka Ladin. “A transactional model for long-running activities.” In Proceedings of the 17th Conference on Very Large Databases. Morgan Kaufmann, September 1991.Google Scholar
  6. [Fern93]
    Christer Fernström. “Process WEAVER: Adding process support to UNIX.” In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on the Software Process, pages 12–26. IEEE Computer Society Press, February 1993.Google Scholar
  7. [Gruh95]
    Volker Gruhn and Stefan Wolf. “Software process improvement by business process orientation.” Software Process-Improvement and Practice, Pilot Issue:49–56, August 1995.Google Scholar
  8. [Grun98]
    John C. Grundy and John G. Hosking. “Serendipity: Integrated environment support for process modelling, enactment and work coordination.” Automated Software Engineering, 5(1):27–60, January 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [Kobi93a]
    Hans-Ulrich Kobialka and Carsten Meyke. “Views on an object-oriented software engineering environment.” In H-Y. Lee, T.F. Reid, and S. Jarzabek, editors, Proceedings of the Sixth International Workshop on Computer-Aided Software Engineering, pages 338–347. IEEE Computer Society Press, July 1993.Google Scholar
  10. [Kobi93b]
    Hans-Ulrich Kobialka and Carsten Meyke. “Configurations are versions, too.” In Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Software Configuration Management (Preprint), pages 156–164 Baltimore, Maryland, May 1993.Google Scholar
  11. [Kobi98a]
    Hans-Ulrich Kobialka and Claus Lewerentz. “Incrremental change of process support.” 1998. ftp://set.gmd.de/pub/fit/kobialka/Process Change.ps.gz.Google Scholar
  12. [Kobi98b]
    Hans-Ulrich Kobialka and Claus Lewerentz. “Support for change request driven software processes.” 1998. ftp://set.gmd.de/pub/fit/kobialka/CRdSP.ps.gz.Google Scholar
  13. [McCa98]
    Eric K. McCall, Lori A. Clarke, and Leon J. Osterweil. “An adaptable generation approach to agenda management.” In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Software Engineering. ACM Press, April 1998.Google Scholar
  14. [Ous94]
    John K. Ousterhout. Tcl and the Tk Toolkit. Addison Wesley 1994.Google Scholar
  15. [Pene94]
    Maria H. Penedo. “Life-cycle (sub) process scenario.” In C. Ghezzi, editor Proceedings of the 9th International Software Process Workshop, pages 141–143. IEEE Computer Society Press, October 1994.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hans-Ulrich Kobialka
    • 1
  • Claus Lewerentz
    • 2
  1. 1.GMD, Schloß BirlinghovenSankt AugustinGermany
  2. 2.Technical University of CottbusCottbusGermany

Personalised recommendations