Advertisement

Component Criteria for Information System Families

  • Stan Jarzabek
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1626)

Abstract

In this paper, we discuss component technologies in the context of information system (IS) families. An IS family is characterized by common requirements, shared by all the family members, and variant requirements that may differ across family members. Many variant requirements are non-local, i.e., they cannot be confined to a single system component, on contrary, they affect many components in complex ways. An effective generic architecture for an IS family should provide means to handle anticipated and unexpected variant requirements and support evolution of the family over years. In the paper, we illustrate problems that arise in supporting IS families and describe a generic architecture that includes global, cross-component structures to deal with changes during customization and evolution of an IS family.

Keywords

Software Architecture Generic Architecture Facility Type Specification Frame Variant Requirement 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Bass, L., Clements, P. and Kazman, R. Software Architecture in Practice, Addison-Wesley, 1998Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bassett, P. Framing Software Reuse–Lessons from Real World, Yourdon Press, Prentice Hall, 1997Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Batory, D et al. “The GenVoca Model of Software-System Generators,” IEEE Software, September 1994, pp. 89–94Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Digre, T. “Business Component Architecture,” IEEE Software, September/October 1998, pp. 60–69Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Johnson, R. and Foote, B. “Designing Reusable Classes,” Journal of Component-Oriented Programming, June 1988, Vol.1,No.2, pp. 22–35.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Krieger, D. and Adler, R. “The Emergence of Distributed Component Platforms,” IEEE Computer, March 1998, pp. 43–53Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Parnas, D. “On the Design and Development of Program Families,” IEEE Trans. on Software Eng., March 1976, p. 1–9Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sommerville, I. and Dean, G. “PCL: a language for modelling evolving system architectures,” Software Engineering Journal, March 1996, pp.111–121Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tracz, W. Collected overview reports from the DSSA project, Technical Report, Loral Federal Systems Owego. (1994).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stan Jarzabek
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer Science, School of ComputingNational University of SingaporeLower Kent Ridge RoadSingapore

Personalised recommendations