An ontologically-based evaluation of software design methods

Knowledge Engineering Review

Volumn 24, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 41-58

  Kannengiesser, Udo ^a,b   Zhu, Liming ^a,b  

^a CSIRO   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DESIGN METHOD; EVALUATING SOFTWARE; METHOD INTEGRATION;

COMPUTER SOFTWARE SELECTION AND EVALUATION; DESIGN;

SOFTWARE DESIGN;

EID: 68449090931     PISSN: 02698889     EISSN: 14698005     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0269888909000113     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Agile Alliance. 2007. http://www.agilealliance.org/home
2. America, P., Rommes, E. & Obbink, H. 2004. Multi-view variation modeling for scenario analysis. In Workshop on Product Family Engineering (PFE-5), van der Linden, F. (ed.). Springer, 44-65.
3. Asimov, M. 1962. Introduction to Design. Prentice-Hall.
4. Bachmann, F., Bass, L. & Klein, M. 2003. Deriving Architectural Tactics: A Step toward Methodical Architectural Design. Technical report, CMU/SEI-TR-2003-004. Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University.
5. Bartlett, F. C. 1932 (reprinted in 1977). Remembering: A Study in Experimental and Social Psychology. Cambridge University Press.
6. Bickhard, M. H. & Campbell, R. L. 1996. Topologies of learning. New Ideas in Psychology 14(2), 111-156.
7. Clancey, W. J. 1997. Situated Cognition: On Human Knowledge and Computer Representations. Cambridge University Press.
8. Dewey, J. 1896 (reprinted in 1981). The reflex arc concept in psychology. Psychological Review 3, 357-370.
9. Edwards, S. H. 2004. Using software testing to move students from trial-and-error to reflection-in-action. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin 36(1), 26-30.
10. Falessi, D., Cantone, G. & Kruchten, P. 2007. Do architecture design methods meet architects' needs? In Working IEEE/IFIP Conference on Software Architecture (WICSA'07). Mumbai, India, unnumbered.
11. Gero, J. S. 1990. Design prototypes: a knowledge representation schema for design. AI Magazine 11(4), 26-36.
12. Gero, J. S. & Kannengiesser, U. 2004. The situated function-behaviour-structure framework. Design Studies 25(4), 373-391.
13. Gero, J. S. & Kannengiesser, U. 2007a. A function-behavior-structure ontology of processes. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 21(4), 379-391.
14. Gero, J. S. & Kannengiesser, U. 2007b. An ontological model of emergent design in software engineering. In International Conference on Engineering Design'07, Bocquet, J.-C. (ed.). Ecole Centrale Paris, France 70, 1-12.
15. Guindon, R. 1990. Designing the design process: exploiting opportunistic thoughts. Human-Computer Interaction 5, 305-344.
16. Hazzan, O. & Tomayko, J. 2004. The reflective practitioner perspective in software engineering. CHI 2004 Workshop on Designing for Reflective Practitioners. ISR Technical report, UCI-ISR-04-2, 75-78.
17. Hofmeister, C., Nord, R. L. & Soni, D. 2005. Global analysis: Moving from software requirements specification to structural views of the software architecture. IEE Proceedings Software 152(4), 187-197.
18. Hofmeister, C., Kruchten, P., Nord, R. L., Obbink, H., Ran, A. & America, P. 2007. A general model of software architecture design derived from five industrial approaches. Journal of Systems and Software 80(1), 106-126.
19. Kerievsky, J. 2004. Refactoring to Patterns. Addison-Wesley.
20. de Kleer, J. & Brown, J. S. 1984. A qualitative physics based on confluences. Artificial Intelligence 24, 7-83.
21. Kruchten, P. 2004. The Rational Unified Process: An Introduction. Addison-Wesley.
22. Kruchten, P. 2005. Casting software design in the function-behaviour- structure framework. IEEE Software 22(2), 52-58.
23. McNeill, T., Gero, J. S. & Warren, J. 1998. Understanding conceptual electronic design using protocol analysis. Research in Engineering Design 10(3), 129-140.
24. Osterweil, L. J. 2005. Unifying microprocess and macroprocess research. In Unifying the Software Process Spectrum, Li, M., Boehm, B. & Osterweil, L. J. (eds). Springer, 68-74.
25. Purao, S., Rossi, M. & Bush, A. 2002. Towards an understanding of the use of problem and design spaces during object-oriented system development. Information and Organization 12(4), 249-281.
26. Schön, D. A. 1983. The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. Harper Collins.
27. Schön, D. A. & Wiggins, G. 1992. Kinds of seeing and their functions in designing. Design Studies 13(2), 135-156.
28. Smith, G. J. & Gero, J. S. 2005. What does an artificial design agent mean by being 'situated'? Design Studies 26(5), 535-561.
29. Song, X. & Osterweil, L. J. 1992. Toward objective, systematic design-method comparisons. IEEE Software 9(3), 43-53.
30. Suwa, M., Gero, J. S. & Purcell, T. 1999. Unexpected discoveries and s-inventions of design requirements: A key to creative designs. In Computational Models of Creative Design IV, Gero, J. S. & Maher, M. L. (eds). Key Centre of Design Computing and Cognition, University of Sydney, 297-320.
31. Talby, D., Hazzan, O., Dubinsky, Y. & Keren, A. 2006. Reflections on reflection in agile software development. In AGILE 2006, Maurer, F. and Melnik, G. (eds). Minneapolis, MN, USA, 100-112.
32. Wojcik, R., Bachmann, F., Bass, L., Clements, P., Merson, P., Nord, R. L. & Wood, B. 2006. Attribute-Driven Design (ADD), Version 2.0. Technical report, CMU/SEI-2006-TR-023. Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University.
33. Woodcock, A. & Bartlett, R. 2005. Software authoring as design conversation. In Workshop of the Psychology of Programming Interest Group, Romero, P., Good, J., Acosta Chaparro, E. & Bryant, S. (eds). University of Sussex, 203-214.
34. Zhu, L., Jeffery, R., Staples, M., Huo, M. & Tran, T. T. 2007. Effects of architecture and technical development process on micro-process. In International Conference on Software Process 2007, Raffo, D. M., Wang, Q. & Pfahl, D. (eds)., Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 49-60. Springer-Verlag.
35. Ziemke, T. 1999. Rethinking grounding. In Understanding Representation in the Cognitive Sciences: Does Representation Need Reality?, Riegler, A., Peschl, M. & von Stein, A. (eds). Plenum Press, 177-190.