Future Directions in CASE Repositories

Author(s):  
Ajantha Dahanayake

Today, components and Component Based Development (CBD) is seen as one of the important events in the evolution of information technology. Components and CBD offer the promise of a software marketplace where components may be built, bought, or sold in a manner similar to components in other industries. In the light of the ongoing developments, in the manner and art of developing software systems, it is important to consider how the Computer Aided Systems Engineering (CASE) environment that supports building these systems can be produced on a CBD approach. In spite of the fact that CASE environments have been around since the ’70s, there are still many problems with these environments. Among the problems of CASE environments are the lack of conceptual models to help understand the technology, the poor state of user requirements specification, inflexible method, support and complicated integration facilities, which contribute to the dissatisfaction in CASE users. During the ’90s there has been a growing need to provide a more formal basis to the art of software development and maintenance through standardized process and product models. The importance of CAME (Computer Aided Method Engineering) in CASE led to the development of CASE shells, MetaCASE tools, or customizable CASE environments that were intended to overcome the inflexibility of method support. The declining cost of computing technology and its increasing functionality, specifically in graphic user interfaces, has contributed to the present re-invention of CASE environments. CASE research in the last decade has addressed issues such as method integration, multiple user support, multiple representation paradigms, method modifiability and evolution, and information retrieval and computation facilities. Considerable progress has been made by isolating particular issues and providing a comprehensive solution with certain trade-off on limited flexibility. The requirement of a fully Component Based architecture for CASE environments has been not examined properly. The combination of requirements of flexibility in terms of support for arbitrary modeling techniques, and evolution of the development environment to ever-changing functionality and applications never the less needs a flexible environment architectures. Therefore, the theory formulation and development of a prototype for designing a next generation of CASE environments is addressed in this book. A CAME environment is considered as a component of a CASE environment. A comprehensive solution is sought to the environment problem by paying attention to a conceptual model of such an environment that has been designed to avoid the confusion around integration issues, and to meet the specification of user requirements concerning a component-based architecture. A CAME environment provides a fully flexible environment for method specification and integration, and can be used for information systems design activities. A large part of this book reports how this theory leads to the designing of the architecture of such an environment. This final chapter contains a review of the theory and an assessment of the extent to which its applicability is upheld.

Author(s):  
Ajantha Dahanayake

Today, components and Component Based Development (CBD) is seen as one of the important events in the evolution of information technology. Components and CBD offer the promise of a software marketplace where components may be built, bought, or sold in a manner similar to components in other industries. In the light of the ongoing developments, in the manner and art of developing software systems, it is important to consider how the Computer Aided Systems Engineering (CASE) environment that supports building these systems can be produced on a CBD approach. In spite of the fact that CASE environments have been around since the ’70s, there are still many problems with these environments. Among the problems of CASE environments are the lack of conceptual models to help understand the technology, the poor state of user requirements specification, inflexible method, support and complicated integration facilities, which contribute to the dissatisfaction in CASE users.


Author(s):  
GREG BOONE

Although the majority of professional trade press and academic attention regarding CASE (Computer Aided Software/Systems Engineering) has focused on technology, software developers have not been deluded by overinflated productivity gains attributed to those technologies. Truly profound technologies require a concomitant change in methods, practices, and techniques. Unfortunately, the majority of the software industry has had the expectation that CASE will automate their current work without rethinking work practices. Changing work practices, particularly among highly independent-minded software developers, who prize independent creativity more than team engineering, is the most difficult challenge facing the advance of the software development profession. Equally difficult is the ideological change from a productivity improvement expectation to a quality improvement expectation. This paper examines the current rate of CASE adoption and the changes necessary to accelerate its successful adoption.


1992 ◽  
Vol 36 (4) ◽  
pp. 404-408
Author(s):  
Jim A. Carter

Rapid prototyping is a powerful tool both for analyzing user requirements and for involving the users in the design of suitable user interfaces. With it, the analysts/designers have users focus on frequent presentations of incomplete prototypes in order to get realistic expressions of the users' needs and wants. If not properly managed, these presentations may miss their objectives and either become high pressure sales pitches for designs or endless cycles of minor changes. Suitable management methods are required to ensure that the use of prototyping provides its expected benefits The process oriented nature of prototyping requires some different management techniques from those used to manage more traditional and artifact oriented analysis and design activities.


2010 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 56-70 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shamal Faily ◽  
Ivan Fléchais

Understanding how to better elicit, specify, and manage requirements for secure and usable software systems is a key challenge in security software engineering, however, there lacks tool-support for specifying and managing the voluminous amounts of data the associated analysis yields. Without these tools, the subjectivity of analysis may increase as design activities progress. This paper describes CAIRIS (Computer Aided Integration of Requirements and Information Security), a step toward tool-support for usable secure requirements engineering. CAIRIS not only manages the elements associated with task, requirements, and risk analysis, it also supports subsequent analysis using novel approaches for analysing and visualising security and usability. The authors illustrate an application of CAIRIS by describing how it was used to support requirements analysis in a critical infrastructure case study.


2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 177-184
Author(s):  
Anastasios Tzotzis ◽  
◽  
Athanasios Manavis ◽  
Nikolaos Efkolidis ◽  
Panagiotis Kyratsis ◽  
...  

The automated generation of G-code for machining processes is a valuable tool at the hands of every engineer and machinist. Nowadays, many software systems exist that provide automated functions related to G-code generation. Most free software require the import of a Drawing Exchange Format (DXF) file and cannot work directly on a 3D part. On the contrast, the equivalent commercially-available software systems are feature-rich and can provide a variety of automated processes, but are usually highly priced. The presented application aims to supplement the existing free Computer Aided Manufacturing (CAM) systems by providing a way of generating G-code for drilling operations, using already owned commercial 3D Computer Aided Design (CAD) systems such as SolidWorksTM. Thus, in the case of 3D part drilling, a standard 3D CAD system is sufficient since the code can be adopted by most modern CAD software with minor changes. Moreover, no specialized CAM software is required. In order to achieve this automation, the Application Programming Interface (API) of SolidWorks™ 2018 was utilized, which allows for the design of visualized User Interfaces (UI) and the development of code under the Visual Basic for Applications (VBA™) programming language. The available API methods are employed to recognize the features that were used to design the part, as well as extract the geometric parameters of each of these features. In addition, an embedded calculator automatically defines the cutting conditions (cutting speed, feed and tool) based on the user selections. Finally, the application generates the Computer Numerical Control (CNC) code for the summary of the discovered holes according to the standardized G-code commands; the output can be a typical TXT or NC file that can be easily converted to the preference of the user if necessary.


Author(s):  
Shamal Faily ◽  
Ivan Fléchais

Understanding how to better elicit, specify, and manage requirements for secure and usable software systems is a key challenge in security software engineering, however, there lacks tool-support for specifying and managing the voluminous amounts of data the associated analysis yields. Without these tools, the subjectivity of analysis may increase as design activities progress. This paper describes CAIRIS (Computer Aided Integration of Requirements and Information Security), a step toward tool-support for usable secure requirements engineering. CAIRIS not only manages the elements associated with task, requirements, and risk analysis, it also supports subsequent analysis using novel approaches for analysing and visualising security and usability. The authors illustrate an application of CAIRIS by describing how it was used to support requirements analysis in a critical infrastructure case study.


2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Cloutier ◽  
Sara McComb ◽  
Abhijit Deshmukh ◽  
Teresa Zigh ◽  
Peter Korfiatis ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Robert G. Eggleston ◽  
Catherine Burns ◽  
James Gualtieri ◽  
Gavan Lintern ◽  
Sterling Wiggins ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document