Metamodeling the Quality of the Web Development Process' Intermediate Artifacts

WE practices lack an impact on industry, partly due to a WE field that is not quality-aware. In fact, it is difficult to find WE methodologies that pay explicit attention to quality aspects. However, the use of a systematic process that includes quality concerns from the earliest stages of development can contribute to easing the building up of quality-guaranteed Web applications without drastically increasing development costs and time-to-market. In this kind of process, quality issues should be taken into account while developing each outgoing artifact, from the requirements model to the final application. Also, quality models should be defined to evaluate the quality of intermediate WE artifacts and how it contributes to improving the quality of the deployed application. In order to tackle its construction while avoiding some of the most common problems that existing quality models suffer from, in this paper we propose a number of WE quality models to address the idiosyncrasies of the different stakeholders and WE software artifacts involved. Additionally, we propose that these WE quality models are supported by an ontology-based WE measurement meta-model that provides a set of concepts with clear semantics and relationships. This WE Quality Metamodel is one of the main contributions of this paper. Furthermore, we provide an example that illustrates how such a metamodel may drive the definition of a particular WE quality model.

[1]  Graeme G. Shanks,et al.  Improving the quality of data models: empirical validation of a quality management framework , 2003, Inf. Syst..

[2]  Silvia Mara Abrahão,et al.  Early Usability Evaluation in Model Driven Architecture Environments , 2006, 2006 Sixth International Conference on Quality Software (QSIC'06).

[3]  Daniel L. Moody,et al.  Theoretical and practical issues in evaluating the quality of conceptual models: current state and future directions , 2005, Data Knowl. Eng..

[4]  Mario Piattini,et al.  Ontologies for Software Engineering and Software Technology , 2010 .

[5]  Brian Fitzgerald,et al.  Hypermedia systems development practices: a survey , 2005, IEEE Software.

[6]  Dr. Melody Y. Ivory Automated Web Site Evaluation , 2003, Human-Computer Interaction Series.

[7]  Mario Piattini,et al.  Ontology driven definition of a usability model for second generation portals , 2006, ICWE '06.

[8]  Thomas R. Gulledge,et al.  Software Engineering Economics and Declining Budgets , 1994 .

[9]  Mario Piattini,et al.  A Web Metrics Survey Using WQM , 2004, ICWE.

[10]  Andrea Maurino,et al.  A Model and an XSL Framework for Analyzing the Quality of WebML Conceptual Schemas , 2002, ER.

[11]  John Krogstie,et al.  Defining quality aspects for conceptual models , 1995, ISCO.

[12]  Rex B. Kline,et al.  Usability measurement and metrics: A consolidated model , 2006, Software Quality Journal.

[13]  Coral Calero,et al.  and Software Technology Ontologies in Software Engineering and , 2006 .

[14]  José Ramón Hilera,et al.  Using Ontologies in Software Engineering and Technology , 2006, Ontologies for Software Engineering and Software Technology.

[15]  Mario Piattini,et al.  Towards a consistent terminology for software measurement , 2006, Inf. Softw. Technol..

[16]  R. Geoff Dromey,et al.  A Model for Software Product Quality , 1995, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..

[17]  Paolo Paolini,et al.  Model-driven development of Web applications: the AutoWeb system , 2000, TOIS.

[18]  Mario Piattini,et al.  Medición del Software Ontología y Metamodelo , 2006 .

[19]  Gustavo Rossi,et al.  Measuring Web Application Quality with WebQEM , 2002, IEEE Multim..

[20]  Jakob Nielsen,et al.  Designing Web Usability: The Practice of Simplicity , 1999 .

[21]  Sandro Morasca,et al.  Defining and Validating Measures for Object-Based High-Level Design , 1999, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..