Constraints in CASE tools: results from curiosity driven research

A. Brooks, L. Scott
{"title":"Constraints in CASE tools: results from curiosity driven research","authors":"A. Brooks, L. Scott","doi":"10.1109/ASWEC.2001.948522","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Curious about a report of disagreement between ratings of restrictiveness of methodological constraints in computer-aided software engineering (CASE) tools, two inspection-style studies were carried out to determine the extent of variation in end-users' beliefs about methodological constraint environments in CASE tools. The extent of variation was found to be significant. Major variations in belief were caused by varying use of the methodology checker, inability to create proper tests for the presence of constraints, and ambiguity in natural language expressions of the methodological constraints under inspection. Our findings have important implications for CASE tool design and construction regarding the methodology checker, support for alternative approaches to design work, and the human-computer interface. Researchers must also take cognizance of individual variation when searching for the 'ideal' methodological constraint environment.","PeriodicalId":360336,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings 2001 Australian Software Engineering Conference","volume":"539 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2001-08-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"10","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings 2001 Australian Software Engineering Conference","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ASWEC.2001.948522","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

Abstract

Curious about a report of disagreement between ratings of restrictiveness of methodological constraints in computer-aided software engineering (CASE) tools, two inspection-style studies were carried out to determine the extent of variation in end-users' beliefs about methodological constraint environments in CASE tools. The extent of variation was found to be significant. Major variations in belief were caused by varying use of the methodology checker, inability to create proper tests for the presence of constraints, and ambiguity in natural language expressions of the methodological constraints under inspection. Our findings have important implications for CASE tool design and construction regarding the methodology checker, support for alternative approaches to design work, and the human-computer interface. Researchers must also take cognizance of individual variation when searching for the 'ideal' methodological constraint environment.
CASE工具中的约束:好奇心驱动研究的结果
对计算机辅助软件工程(CASE)工具中方法约束的限制性评级之间的分歧报告感到好奇,进行了两项检查式研究,以确定最终用户对CASE工具中方法约束环境的信念的变化程度。变异的程度被发现是显著的。看法的主要差异是由于对方法检查器的不同使用、无法对存在的限制条件进行适当的测试以及对所检查的方法限制条件的自然语言表达含糊不清造成的。我们的发现对于CASE工具的设计和构建具有重要的意义,包括方法论检查器、对设计工作的替代方法的支持以及人机界面。在寻找“理想的”方法约束环境时,研究人员还必须考虑到个体差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信