[oslc-rm] Fw: RM/AM integration scenarios

[Dominic Tulley]

In response to the "crucial" question.

It seems to me that this scenario is requirements elaboration with 
supporting information in a modelling tool. 

The implementation uses proxies/surrogates in DOORS because that's the 
only way to subsequently trace from the requirements through the model 
elements and (presumably) on to subsequent requirements (and subsequent 
model elements?).

-Dominic
==================
Dominic Tulley
RM Architect
Rational Requirements Definition and Management
IBM Software Group
==================



From:
Ian Green1/UK/IBM at IBMGB
To:
oslc-rm at open-services.net
Cc:
Vishwanath Ramaswamy <vramaswa at ca.ibm.com>
Date:
04/03/2010 13:52
Subject:
[oslc-rm] RM/AM integration scenarios
Sent by:
oslc-rm-bounces at open-services.net



Hello all,
We've been discussing the scenario Torge to the wiki describing how 
derived requirements are produced for safety-critical systems at EADS.

The basic workflow is that requirements are created in RM, and elaborated 
until a covering set of <<derived>> requirements is obtained.

The elaboration of these requirements is performed in a modelling tool, 
where the analysis is performed and the <<derived>> requirements are 
obtained.  These requirements 

Traceability is created during the workflow:

        Requirements <<satisfiedBy>> Model elements <<derived>> Model 
elements
        Requirements <<derived>> Requirements (*)

The <<derived>> requirements on the RM side are "human-readable" 
representations of the corresponding <<derived>> model elements.  Torge 
mentioned PNGs, PDFs and so on - imaging a PNG of a use-case diagram.

Here are observations that we've made on this scenario:

        - this is certainly a valid scenario, but we wonder to what extent 

the "human-readable" representations of the model should be treated as RM 
resources.  Is this a necessary part of the integration scenario, or is it 

a consequence of the limitations of the tools that are currently in use 
(DOORS and Rhapsody). 
        - the scenario postconditions are that the requirements in 
question are covered - for each one, there is a <<satisfying>> model 
element.   Currently, OSLC query would not admit such a question to be 
asked.
        - OSLC RM does not talk about "pictures" as requirements, only 
textual requirements.  we discussed this during 1.0 and deferred it.

I think a crucial question is the first one raised here - do we see 
Torge's scenario as being requirement elaboration, with supporting 
evidence provided by models, or do we see it as model element proxies in 
RM.

Comments/discussion welcomed.



best wishes,
    -ian

ian.green at uk.ibm.com (Ian Green1/UK/IBM at IBMGB)
Chief Software Architect, Requirements Definition and Management
IBM Rational





Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 
741598. 
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU







_______________________________________________
Oslc-Rm mailing list
Oslc-Rm at open-services.net
http://open-services.net/mailman/listinfo/oslc-rm_open-services.net









Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 
741598. 
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU





-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://open-services.net/pipermail/oslc-rm_open-services.net/attachments/20100305/1f790475/attachment-0003.html>