Towards Systematic Integration of Quality Requirements into Software Architecture

  • Azadeh Alebrahim
  • Denis Hatebur
  • Maritta Heisel
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6903)

Abstract

We present a model- and pattern-based approach that allows software engineers to take quality requirements into account right from the beginning of the software development process. The approach comprises requirements analysis as well as the software architecture design, in which quality requirements are reflected explicitly.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Becker, S., Dešić, S., Doppelhamer, J., Huljenić, D., Koziolek, H., Kruse, E., Masetti, M., Safonov, W., Skuliber, I., Stammel, J., Trifu, M., Tysiak, J., Weiss, R.: Q-ImPrESS Project Deliverable D1.1 – Requirements document. final version, Q-ImPrESS Consortium (2009)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Choppy, C., Hatebur, D., Heisel, M.: Systematic architectural design based on problem patterns. In: Avgeriou, P., Grundy, J., Hall, J., Lago, P., Mistrik, I. (eds.) Relating Software Requirements and Architectures, ch. 9. Springer, Heidelberg (to appear, 2011)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ford, C., Gileadi, I., Purba, S., Moerman, M.: Patterns for Performance and Operability. Auerbach Publications (2008)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hatebur, D., Heisel, M.: Making Pattern- and Model-Based Software Development More Rigorous. In: Dong, J.S., Zhu, H. (eds.) ICFEM 2010. LNCS, vol. 6447, pp. 253–269. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hatebur, D., Heisel, M.: A UML profile for requirements analysis of dependable software. In: Schoitsch, E. (ed.) SAFECOMP 2010. LNCS, vol. 6351, pp. 317–331. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jackson, M.: Problem Frames. Analyzing and structuring software development problems. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2001)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jürjens, J.: Secure Systems Development with UML. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)MATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mouratidis, H.: A Security Oriented Approach in the Development of Multiagent Systems: Applied to the Management of the Health and Social Care Needs of Older People in England. PhD thesis, University of Sheffield, U.K (2004)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mouratidis, H., Jürjens, J.: From goal-driven security requirements engineering to secure design. Int. J. Intell. Syst. 25, 813–840 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Schumacher, M., Fernandez-Buglioni, E., Hybertson, D., Buschmann, F., Sommerlad, P.: Security Patterns: Integrating Security and Systems Engineering. Wiley & Sons, Chichester (2005)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    UML Revision Task Force. OMG Unified Modeling Language (UML), Superstructure, http://www.omg.org/spec/UML/2.3/Superstructure/PDF
  12. 12.
    UML Revision Task Force. UML Profile for MARTE: Modeling and Analysis of Real-Time Embedded Systems, http://www.omg.org/spec/MARTE/1.0/PDF
  13. 13.
    Wojcik, R., Bachmann, F., Bass, L., Clements, P., Merson, P., Nord, R., Wood, B.: Attribute-Driven Design (ADD). Version 2.0, Software Engineering Institute (2006)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Yskout, K., Scandariato, R., Win, B.D., Joosen, W.: Transforming security requirements into architecture. In: Proc. of the 3rd Int. Conf. on Availability, Reliability and Security, pp. 1421–1428. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2008)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Azadeh Alebrahim
    • 1
  • Denis Hatebur
    • 1
  • Maritta Heisel
    • 1
  1. 1.University Duisburg-EssenGermany

Personalised recommendations