Arguing conformance

IEEE Software

Volumn 29, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 50-57

  Graydon, Patrick ^a   Habli, Ibrahim ^a   Hawkins, Richard ^a   Kelly, Tim ^a   Knight, John ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF YORK   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA   (United States)

Author keywords

software and system safety; software engineering; standards

Indexed keywords

PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICES; SAFETY ARGUMENTS; SOFTWARE ASSURANCE; SOFTWARE STANDARDS; SOFTWARE SYSTEMS; SYSTEM SAFETY;

SAFETY FACTOR; SOFTWARE ENGINEERING; STANDARDS;

REGULATORY COMPLIANCE;

EID: 84860425909     PISSN: 07407459     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1109/MS.2012.26     Document Type: Article

References (9)

1. CAP 670, Air Traffi c Services Safety Requirements, UK Civil Aviation Authority, 2010.
2. 61508-3, Functional Safety of Electrical/Electronic/ Programmable Electronic Safety-Related Systems -Part 3: Software Requirements, Int'l Electrotechnical Commission, 2010.
3. DO-178B, Software Considerations in Airborne Systems and Equipment Certifi cation, RTCA, 1992.
4. S.L. Pfl eeger, N. Fenton, and N. Page, "Evaluating Software Engineering Standards," Computer, Sept. 1994, pp. 71-79.
5. T. Bray et al., eds., Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.0, 5th ed., World Wide Web Consortium, 2008; www.w3.org/TR/2008/PER-xml-20080205.
6. Information Assurance: National Partnership Offers Benefi ts, but Faces Considerable Challenges, report GAO-06-392, US Government Accountability Office, 2006.
7. T. Kelly, "Arguing Safety-A Systematic Approach to Managing Safety Cases," doctoral dissertation, Dept. Computer Science, Univ. of York, 1998.
8. ASCAD: The Adelard Safety Case Development Manual, Adelard, 1998.
9. Argumentation Metamodel (ARM), beta 1, Object Management Group, 2010; www.omg.org/spec/ARM/1.0/Beta1.