Advertisement

Specification of coordinated behaviour by SOCCA

  • Gregor Engels
  • Luuk Groenewegen
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 772)

Abstract

The software process situations to be modelled usually exhibit a great diversity and complexity, as data, local behaviour as well as coordination of behaviour of human and non-human agents have to be modelled on a fine-grained level. Unfortunately no existing specification formalism seems to be sufficiently suitable. To this aim the paper proposes a specification formalism, which combines the best fitting (parts of) different formalisms, in order to attain a satisfactory specification. The combination discussed in this paper is SOCCA (Specifications Of Coordinated and Cooperative Activities), composed of Extended Entity-Relationship (EER) based object-oriented modelling for the data perspective, state transition diagrams for the local behaviour perspective, and PARADIGM for the coordination of behaviour perspective.

Keywords

Process Modeling Object-Oriented Concepts State Transition Diagrams Coordinated Behaviour 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Ambriola V., Jaccheri M.L., Definition and Enactment of Oikos Software Process Entities, First European Workshop on Software Process Modelling, Milano, May 1991.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bandinelli S., Fuggetta A., Ghezzi C., Software Processes as Real Time Systems: A case study using High-Level Petri nets, First European Workshop on Software Process Modelling, Milano, Italy, May 1991.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Belkhatir N., Estublier J. and Melo W., Adele 2: An Approach to Software Development Coordination, First European Workshop on Software Process Modelling, Milano, May 1991.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Benali K., Boudjlida N., Charoy F., Derniame J.C., Godart C., Griffiths P., Gruhn V., Jamart P., Legait A., Oldfield D., Oquendo F., Presentation of the ALF Project, First Int. Conf. on System Development Environments and Factories, Berlin, May 1989.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Conradi R., Osjord E., Westby P., Liu C., Initial Software Process Management in EPOS, Software Engineering Journal, Special Issue on Software Environments and Factories, September 1991.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Deiters W., Gruhn V., Managing Software Processes in MELMAC, Fourth ACM SIGSOFT Symposium on Software Developments Environments, Irvine, December 1990.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    G. Engels, M. Gogolla, U. Hohenstein, K. Hülsmann, P. Löhr-Richter, G. Saake, H.D. Ehrich: Conceptual Modelling of Database Applications Using an Extended ER Model. Data & Knowledge Engineering, North-Holland, Vol. 9, 157–204, 1992Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    G. Engels, L.P.J. Groenewegen: Specification of Coordinated Behaviour in the Software Development Process (Position Paper). In J.C. Derniame (ed.): Proc. 2nd European Workshop on Software Process Technology (EWSPT 92), Trondheim (Norway), Springer-Verlag, Berlin, LNCS 635, 58–60, 1992Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Emmerich W., Junkermann G., Schäfer W., MERLIN: Knowledge-Based Process Modelling, First European Workshop on Software Process Modelling, Milano, May 1991.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fernström C., PROCESS WEAVER: adding process support to UNIX, In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on the Software Process Berlin, Germany, February 1993, pp.12–26.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Peter H. Feiler and Watts S. Humphrey, Software Process Development and Enactment: Concepts and Definitions, In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on the Software Process, pages 28–40, Berlin, Germany, February 1993.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Groenewegen, L.P.J., Parallel phenomena 1–14 University of Leiden, Dep. of Computer Sc., Techn. Rep. 86-20, 87-01, 87-05, 87-06, 87-11, 87-18, 87-21, 87-29, 87-32, 88-15, 88-17, 88-18, 90-18, 91-19. 1986–1991.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Harel, D.: Statecharts: A Visual Formalism for Complex Systems, in Science of Computer Programming, Vol. 8, No. 3, pp. 231–274, June 1987Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hennemann, Chr., Schacht, J.: Design and Implementation of a Language for the Visual Specification of Actions on Extended Entity-Relationship Databases. Diploma Thesis (german), Technical University of Braunschweig, 1991Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Heimbigner, D., Sutton, St.M., Osterweil, L.: Managing Change in Process-Centered Environments. In Proc. of the 4th ACM/SIGSOFT Symposium on Software Development Environments, Dec. 1990Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kaiser, G.E., Feiler, P.H., Popovich, St.S.: Intelligent Assistance for Software Development and Maintenance. IEEE Software, 40–49, May 1988Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kellner, M., P. Feiler, A. Finkelstein, T. Katayama, L. Osterweil, M. Penedo, H. Rombach, ISWP-6 Software process example. In: Proc. of the 6th Int. Software Process Workshop: support for the software process. Japan, October 1991.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jacques Lonchamp, A Structured Conceptual and Terminological Framework for Software Process Engineering, In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on the Software Process, pages 41–53, Berlin, Germany, February 1993.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Milner, R.: Communication and Concurrency. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, 1989Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Morssink, P.J.A., Behaviour modelling in information systems design: application of the PARADIGM formalism. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Leiden, Dep. of Computer Science, 1993Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Peuschel, B., Schäfer, W., Wolf, St.: A Knowledge-Based Software Development Environment Supporting Cooperative Work. To appear in International Journal on Software Engineering and Knowledge EngineeringGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Rumbaugh, J., Blaha, M., Premerlani, W., Eddy, F., Lorensen, W.: Object-Oriented Modeling and Design. Englewood Cliffs, Prentice-Hall 1991Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Steen, M.R. van, Modelling dynamic systems by paralle decision processes. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Leiden, Dep. of Computer Sc., 1988.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Warboys B., The IPSE 2.5 Project: Process Modelling as the basis for a support Environment, First Int. Conf. on System Development Environments and Factories, Berlin, 1989.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gregor Engels
    • 1
  • Luuk Groenewegen
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of LeidenRA LeidenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations