Hardware Reference
In-Depth Information
Table 2.
(
continued
)
Rule 23:
Identify
1E
data movement and
1X
data movement for the client piece of
software, and
1E
data movement for the
server piece of software for the
set of
data-valued arguments
of the services
(represented by the class that contains the
service) that participate in the interaction
units contained in a functional process.
Rule 24:
Identify
1E
data movement and
1X
data movement for the client piece of
software, and
1E
data movement for the
server piece of software for each different
object-valued argument
of the services that
participate in the interaction units contained
in a functional process.
Defect
19:
A
service
without
arguments.
Defect 20:
A service with arguments
with repeated names.
Rule 31:
Identify
1R
data movement for the
server piece of software for each different
class
that is used in the
precondition
formulas
of
the services that participate in the interaction
units contained in a functional process.
Defect 21:
A precondition without the
specification of the precondition
formula.
Rule 32:
Identify
1X
data movement for the
client piece of software for all
error messages
of the
precondition formulas
of the services
that participate in the interaction units
contained in a functional process.
Defect 22:
A precondition without an
error message.
Rule 34:
Identify
1R
data movement for the
server piece of software for each different
class
that is used in the
integrity
constraint
formulas
of the class that contains each
service that participates in the interaction
units contained in a functional process.
Defect 23:
An integrity constraint
without the specification of the integrity
formula.
Rule 35:
Identify
1X
data movement for the
client piece of software for all
error messages
of the
integrity constraint formula
of the
class that contains each service that participates
in the interaction units contained in a functional
process.
Defect 24:
An integrity constraint
without an error message.
The list of defect types presented in Table 2 also have been classified using the
Conradi et al. [5] classification. Thus, Defects 9, 10, 15, 19, 22, and 24 correspond to
omissions
; Defects 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, 21, and 23 correspond to an
incorrect
fact
; and Defect 20 corresponds to an
ambiguity
. Therefore, we can state that the
OOmCFP measurement procedure helps in the identification of defects types of con-
ceptual models, which are related to omissions, incorrect facts, and ambiguities.
It is important to note that Defects 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18,
19, 21, and 23 allow the definition of measures that contribute to the evaluation of the
sub-characteristic of
compliance
of the conceptual models (in accordance with the
ISO 9126 standard), because it is possible to determine if the conceptual model is
adhered to the rules and conventions of the model compiler. In the same way, Defects
3, 11, 15, 20, 22, and 24 allow the definition of measures that contribute to the evalua-
tion of the sub-characteristic of
analyzability
of software products (in accordance with
the ISO 9126 standard), because it is possible to diagnostic the possible faults of the
final application in the conceptual models.
