UNIFIED MODELING LANGUAGE: THEORETICAL AND PRACTICAL COMPLEXITY

9th Americas Conference on Information Systems, AMCIS 2003

Volumn , Issue , 2003, Pages 1323-1327

  Erickson, John ^a   Siau, Keng ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA LINCOLN   (United States)

Author keywords

complexity; OO systems development; Systems analysis and design; unified modeling language

Indexed keywords

DESIGN; OBJECT ORIENTED PROGRAMMING; SEMANTICS; SYSTEMS ANALYSIS; VISUAL LANGUAGES;

COMPLEXITY; DESIGN METHODOLOGY; MODEL METHOD; OBJECT MANAGEMENT; OBJECT ORIENTED ANALYSIS AND DESIGN; OBJECT ORIENTED SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT; SYSTEM ANALYSIS AND DESIGN; SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT; THEORETICAL COMPLEXITY; VISUAL MODELING LANGUAGES;

UNIFIED MODELING LANGUAGE;

EID: 85112033323     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (20)

1. Anderson, J., and Lebiere, C., 1998, The Atomic Components of Thought, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
2. st International Conference on software Engineering, Los Angeles, CA. pp. 345-354.
3. Conallen, J., 2000, Building Web-Applications with UML, Addison-Wesley.
4. Dobing, B. and Parsons, J., (2000), Understanding the Role of Use Cases in UML: A Review and Research Agenda, Journal of Database Management, Vol. 11, No. 4. pp. 28 – 36.
5. Dori, D., 2002, “Why Significant UML Change is Unlikely”, Communications of the ACM, Vol. 45, No. 11, November, pp. 82-85.
6. Douglass, B., 2000, Real-Time UML Second Edition: Developing Efficient Objects for Embedded Systems, Addison-Wesley.
7. Duddy, K., 2002, “UML2 Must Enable a Family of Languages”, Communications of the ACM, Vol. 45, No. 11, November, pp. 73-75.
8. Ericsson, K. and Kintsch, W., 1995, “Long-Term Working Memory”, Psychological Review, 102(2) 211-245.
9. Fowler, M. and Highsmith, J., 2001, “The Agile Manifesto”, http://www.sdmagazine.com/print/documnetID=11649.
10. Kim, J., Hahn, J., and Hahn, H., 2000, “How Do We Understand a System with (So) Many diagrams? Cognitive Integration Processes in Diagrammatic Reasoning”, Information Systems Research, Vol. 11, No. 3, September, pp. 284-303.
11. Kobryn, C., 2002, “What to Expect from UML 2.0”, SD Times, accessed 10/22-2002.
12. Marshall, C., 2000, Enterprise Modeling with UML Designing Successful Software Through Business Analysis, Addison-Wesley.
13. McKeown, P., 2001, Information Technology and the Networked Economy, Harcourt College Publishers, Orlando, FL.
14. Mello, Adrian. (2002). ERP Fundamentals, Enterprise, URL: http://zdnet.search.com/search?cat=279&tag=s t.ne.sr.srch.zdnet&q=%22IDC%22.
15. Miller, G., 1956, “The Magical Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two: Some Limits on Our Capacity for Processing Information”, The Psychological Review, Vol. 63 No. 2, pp. 81-97.
16. Rossi, M. and Brinkkemper, S., 1996. “Complexity Metrics for Systems Development Methods and Techniques,” Information Systems, Vol. 21, No. 2 pp. 209-227.
17. Siau, K., and Cao, Q., 2001, “Unified Modeling Language (UML) – A Complexity Analysis”, Journal of Database Management, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 26-34
18. Siau, K., Erickson, J., and Lee, L., 2002, “Complexity of UML: Theoretical versus Practical Complexity”, Workshop on Information Technology and Systems (WITS). Barcelona, Spain, December 16-18, pp. 13-18.
19. Sieber, T. Siau, K. Nah, F. Sieber, M. 2000, “Sap Implementation at the University of Nebraska”, Journal of Information Technology Cases and Applications, Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 41-72.
20. Zendler, A., Pfeiffer, T., Eicks, M., and Lehner, F., 2001, “ Experimental Comparison of Coarse Grained Concepts in UML, OML and TOS”, Journal of Systems and Software, Vol. 57, pp 21-30.