A Proposal for Defining a Set of Basic Items for Project-Specific Traceability Methodologies

One widely accepted approach to implement traceability practices is the use of methodologies. But the information related to organization, stakeholders, product size, and quality requirements may change from one project to another. As a consequence, traceability information differs as well, which arises specific traceability requirements to each project.One common way to cope with this fact is the use of metamodels to underpin methodologies. However most of the traceability metamodeling approaches simply provide a predefined set of concepts, with no extension mechanism.Therefore, customizing a methodology for a specific project is often unsatisfactory. This paper justifies that this problem can be approached if traceability metamodels include a basic set of items, including concepts and traceability structures, designed to be extended according to project features. For this, the right modeling tools are required:that is, some metamodeling principles that support typing and extensibility, together with a general and extensible description of the software process. This second issue is obtained from ISO/IEC 24744 with some additional inputs.This paper explains how to use these tools in practice to define the so called TmM metamodel. Within this paper TmMis applied to a case study in which non-conventional work products have to be considered as part of the trace ability information.

[1]  Cmmi Product Team Capability Maturity Model® Integration (CMMI), Version 1.1--Staged Representation , 2002 .

[2]  Matthias Jarke,et al.  Towards Method-Driven Trace Capture , 1997, CAiSE.

[3]  Peter A. Lindsay,et al.  SubCM: a tool for improved visibility of software change in an industrial setting , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.

[4]  Anne Persson,et al.  Requirements Interdependencies: State of the Art and Future Challenges , 2005 .

[5]  Juan Garbajosa,et al.  Defining and using a Metamodel for Document-Centric Development Methodologies , 2007, ENASE.

[6]  Juan Garbajosa Sopeña,et al.  The Need for a Unifying Traceability Scheme , 2005 .

[7]  Alistair Cockburn,et al.  Selecting a Project 's Methodology , 2000, IEEE Softw..

[8]  Juan Garbajosa,et al.  Analyzing and Systematizing Current Traceability Schemas , 2006, 2006 30th Annual IEEE/NASA Software Engineering Workshop.

[9]  Justin Kelleher A reusable traceability framework using patterns , 2005, TEFSE '05.

[10]  Matthias Jarke,et al.  Toward Reference Models of Requirements Traceability , 2001, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..

[11]  Doron Becker Measuring requirements traceability from multiple angles at multiple lifecycle entry points , 2003, Proceedings. 11th IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference, 2003..

[12]  A. Crespo,et al.  Automated integrated support for requirements-area and validation processes related to system development , 2004, 2nd IEEE International Conference on Industrial Informatics, 2004. INDIN '04. 2004.

[13]  Antje von Knethen,et al.  QuaTrace: a tool environment for (semi-) automatic impact analysis based on traces , 2003, International Conference on Software Maintenance, 2003. ICSM 2003. Proceedings..

[14]  Colin Atkinson,et al.  Profiles in a strict metamodeling framework , 2002, Sci. Comput. Program..

[15]  Alexander Egyed,et al.  Resolving uncertainties during trace analysis , 2004, SIGSOFT '04/FSE-12.

[16]  Juan Garbajosa Sopeña,et al.  Tackling Traceability Challenges through Modeling Principles in Methodologies Underpinned by Metamodels. , 2008, CEE-SET 2008.

[17]  Andrea Zisman,et al.  Rule-based generation of requirements traceability relations , 2004, J. Syst. Softw..

[18]  George Spanoudakis Plausible and adaptive requirement traceability structures , 2002, SEKE '02.

[19]  Alexander Egyed,et al.  Automating requirements traceability: Beyond the record & replay paradigm , 2002, Proceedings 17th IEEE International Conference on Automated Software Engineering,.

[20]  Jérôme Euzenat,et al.  Using Terminology Extraction to Improve Traceability from Formal Models to Textual Requirements , 2000, NLDB.

[21]  Nancy Van Schooenderwoert,et al.  Taming the embedded tiger - agile test techniques for embedded software , 2004, Agile Development Conference.

[22]  Alan W. Brown Model driven architecture: Principles and practice , 2004, Software and Systems Modeling.

[23]  Brian Henderson-Sellers,et al.  The rationale of powertype-based metamodelling to underpin software development methodologies , 2005 .

[24]  Dar-Biau Liu,et al.  Metrics for requirements engineering , 1995, J. Syst. Softw..

[25]  Jane Cleland-Huang,et al.  Utilizing supporting evidence to improve dynamic requirements traceability , 2005, 13th IEEE International Conference on Requirements Engineering (RE'05).

[26]  Justin Kelleher,et al.  Utilizing use case classes for requirement and traceability modeling , 2006 .

[27]  Brian Henderson-Sellers,et al.  A powertype-based metamodelling framework , 2006, Software & Systems Modeling.