This is an old revision of the document!
Auto View Use Cases and Scenarios
We have identified 15 requirements so far.
Requirement Name | Requirement | Rationale | Notes |
---|---|---|---|
Dynamic Views | Viewpoints shall allow for specifying and presenting dynamic Views of the Model. | Views are not static - they can be dynamic. We want to be able to generate any kind view that meets the needs of what we are communicating. This includes animations, interactivity, model2model, homogeneous, heterogeneous. The point is the Expression of the View should only restricted by the needs of communication with stakeholder. | Expression of Views shall support specification of media or format for a range of static and dynamic. |
Styles | The rules for creating the View shall be distinct from the format and presentation styles used to render the View. | This avoids modeling a document directly. it also allows for formats such as slides, interactive web forms, animations etc. | None |
Conformance | The view of the model shall represent the model information in conformance with the rules defined by the viewpoint. | Using a Viewpoint to specify the View provides a way for stockholders to communicate their expectations with respect to what they will see in the View. | None |
Viewpoint Model | The viewpoint shall include properties for: a) Stakeholders (1..*) b) Concerns (1..*) c) Purpose (1) | This descriptive information is present to relate the information that describes concerns and purpose of the View to the stakeholders. | Notes |
Method | The viewpoint shall include an executable specification for a method capable of producing the View. | Views of models cannot be created without a concrete explanation of what information is necessary and how it should be communicated. | None. |
Analysis | The viewpoint method shall include provisions to specify:a) The query that selects the parts of the model (e.g., model elements, figures) to be included in the view b) Rules to transform the model to another model (query usecases) c) Rules for model checking (e.g., consistency and/or completeness checking) d) Rules to transform the model to another model e) Selected output formats (e.g., doc book, html, excel, ppt ..) f) Presentation style (e.g., tabular, text format, ) g) Access controls such-as which roles can create, read, update, and delete information. | Methods need to separate operations on information from format and presentation. | SF update on 12/23/12 |
Interoperability | The viewpoint method shall include provisions for:a) integrating data that is external to the model by reference b) integrating other text and related information directly | TBD | Under consideration |
Configuration Management | The version of the model and the corresponding views shall be maintained and synchronized as required. | Versions of Views are necessary in order to track the change history. | (Sandy added 12/8/12) |
Editability | The view shall be editable via comments that can be reflected in updates to the model. | Views are inherently interactive where possible. Wether editing a diagram, text or tables | Sandy added 12/8/12 |
Inclusion | Shall be capable of including any model element. | The generated document could contain any model element. | Under consideration |
Diagram Views | Diagrams shall be capable of being considered views that conform to Viewpoints. | Diagrams can be considered as a part of the model or as a first-class View of the model. | None. |
Separation of Models | The view model shall be separate from the system model, the format model, and the presentation model. | The document model (definition of chapters, model elements includes, etc.) is separated from the system model. | Under Consideration |
Tool Independence | The definition of the document model shall be tool-independent. | TBD | Under Consideration |
Executable Independence | The viewpoint method shall be independent of a specific modeling tool / version implementation where practical. | Under consideration | Consider a standard api for querying the model) |
Architecture Framework Extensibility | Shall support extension to any compatible architecture framework | The definition of view and viewpoint should be consistent with the latest standard ISO 42010 (to be confirmed) | TBD |
Quality Attribute | Description | Metric | Notes |
---|---|---|---|
expressivity/communicability | TBD | TBD | TBD |
extendability | TBD | TBD | TBD |
composability | TBD | TBD | TBD |
reproducibility | TBD | TBD | TBD |
Principle | Definition | Rationale | Impact |
---|---|---|---|
parsimony | TBD | TBD | TBD |
grounded in fundamentals of MBSE - wymore | TBD | TBD | TBD |
*view centric over document centric → views and viewpoints over documents and sections *method - > reproducible *viewpoint composition → *libraries - > reusability
*Write up general issue of scalability viewpoint methods aren't executable import not scalable. issue is how to specify the argument (model elements as input to) the viewpoint method *** describe alternatives: method library vs viewpoint library
Priority | Issue | Description | Rationale | Possible Fixes | Notes |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Now | Property Ordering | SysML lacks ordering of part properties within multiplicities | TBD | TBD | cant order individual elements of the multiplicity. cant constraint the multiplicity property. UML spec allows for property order so this is maybe a tool bug rather that UML/SysML issue |
Now | Viewpoint Model ELements Are Tags | viewpoint properties are tags - > need ot be props | TBD | TBD | TBD |
Now | Methods are not behaviors | The Viewpoint Method is a simple tag. It needs to become a classifier behavior. | TBD | TBD | TBD |
Now | Query Instead of Import | view imports elements from model. This is not scalable. | TBD | TBD | Consider replacing 'view imports model elements' with 'view queries model'. (cldelp-This could also be Viewpoint Queries.) |
Now | Diagrams should be allowed to be Views | Currently diagrams are not defined as views. It should be possible to distinguish between diagrams that are views and diagrams that are just diagrams | TBD | TBD | TBD |
Future | TBD | composition of behavior classes and blocks not clear. need to be able to compose parametric constraints onto behaviors | TBD | TBD | TBD |
Future | TBD | no way to make a relationship such that a parameter is set to be assigned a model element | TBD | TBD | TBD |
Future | TBD | no way to set a trajectory of specific values | TBD | TBD | TBD |
Future | TBD | view is expressed in terms of one to many artifacts such as diagrams, tables, etc. | TBD | TBD | considering adding a concept of a view artifact, where a view is composed of view artifacts |
TBD | TBD | TBD | TBD | TBD | TBD |
From Cory Casanave in an email to Len Levine on December 7, 2012: The following is the in-progress definitions being developed as part of the MDA guide:
View and Viewpoint A viewpoint specifies a reusable set of criteria for the construction, selection, and presentation of a portion of the information about a system, addressing particular stakeholder concerns. The by far most widely used construct since 1976 is the SQL view construct.
A view is a representation of a particular system that conforms to a viewpoint. We could, for example, have a view representing the security concerns of a payroll system.
For example, if we are creating a model information of a system that shares information there may be views for:
Note that the above views are interrelated, that is there are connections between them that are contained in the ground level, the model and the metamodel but that may or may not be visible in any one viewpoint.
—editorial— While not specifically addressed, I think the intent is that a diagram is part of (could be all of) a view and that a diagram type is part of (could be all of) a viewpoint.
-Cory