Towards an Integrated Model for Functional and User Interface Requirements

  • Rabeb Mizouni
  • Daniel Sinnig
  • Ferhat Khendek
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6409)


Despite the widespread adoption of UML as a standard for modeling software systems, it does not provide adequate support for specifying User Interface (UI) requirements. It has become a common practice to separately use UML use cases for specifying functional requirements and task models for modeling UI requirements. The lack of integration of these two related models is likely to introduce redundancies and inconsistencies into the software development process. In this paper, we propose an integrated model, consisting of use case and task models, for capturing functional and UI requirements. Both artifacts are used in a complementary manner and are formally related through so-called Anchors. Anchors are use case steps that require further elaboration with UI-specific interactions. These interactions are explicitly captured in associated task models. The formal semantics of the integrated model is given with finite state automata.


Functional Requirements UML Use Cases User Interface Requirements Task Models Integrated Requirements Model Finite State Automata 


  1. 1.
    Paternò, F., Santoro, C.: Support for Reasoning about Interactive Systems through Human-Computer Interaction Designers’ Representations. Comput. J. 46(4), 340–357 (2003)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Nobrega, L., Nunes, N.J., Coelho, H.: Mapping ConcurTaskTrees into UML 2.0. In: Gilroy, S.W., Harrison, M.D. (eds.) DSV-IS 2005. LNCS, vol. 3941, pp. 237–248. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bastide, R.e.: An Integration of Task and Use Case Metamodels. In: HCI International, San Diego, CA, USA, 19/07/09-24/07/09 (2009) Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Nunes, N.J., o e Cunha, J.o.F.:Towards a UML profile for interaction design: the Wisdom approach (2000)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    de Paula, M.i.G., da Silva, B.S., Barbosa, S.D.J.: Using an interaction model as a resource for communication in design. In: CHI 2005: CHI 2005 extended abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 1713–1716 (2005)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mizouni, R., et al.: Merging partial system behaviors: composition of use-case automata. IET Software 1(4), 143–160 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Daniel, S., Rabeb, M., Ferhat, K.: Bridging the gap: empowering use cases with task models. In: Proceedings of the 2nd ACM SIGCHI Symposium on Engineering Interactive Computing Systems, ACM, Berlin (2010)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sinnig, D.: Use Case and Task Models: Formal Unification and Integrated Development Methodology, Department of Computer Science and Software Engineering, Concordia University, Montreal (2008)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chechik, M., et al.: Partial Behavioral Models for Requirements and Early Design. In: MMOSS, 06351 (2006)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Leue, S., Mehrmann, L., Rezai, M.: Synthesizing ROOM Models from Message Sequence Chart Specifications. Technical Report 98-06, ECE Dept., University of Waterloo, Canada (October 1998)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Uchitel, S., Kramer, J., Magee, J.: Behavior Model Elaboration using Partial Labeled Transition Systems. In: ESEC/FSE 2003 (2003)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lu, S., et al.: Generating UML Diagrams from Task Models (2003)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rosson, M.B.: Integrating development of task and object models. ACM Commun. 42(1), 49–56 (1999)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rabeb Mizouni
    • 1
  • Daniel Sinnig
    • 2
  • Ferhat Khendek
    • 3
  1. 1.College of Information TechnologyUAE UniversityAl-AinUAE
  2. 2.Faculty of CS and Elec. EngineeringUniversity of RostockGermany
  3. 3.Dept. of Electrical & Computer Eng.Concordia UniversityMontrealCanada

Personalised recommendations