Advertisement

Formal Object-Oriented Method — Foom

  • Paul Swatman
Part of the The Springer International Series in Engineering and Computer Science book series (SECS, volume 371)

Abstract

FOOM (Formal Object-Oriented Methodology) is a method which assists in understanding and modelling organisations and thus information systems. The method promotes:
  • • highly appropriate and precise requirements specifications for information systems

  • • models of organisational and inter-organisational processes, which may form the basis for organisational and network reengineering.

In this paper, I summarise FOOM, which has been under development since 1989 and which was initially described by Swatman & Swatman [[SS92a]], and argue that the FOOM approach offers clear potential benefits within the Information Systems domain. The paper is non-technical in nature and is designed to offer a summary of existing work and future directions. References to the detailed and technical publications of the FOOM project are provided for the interested reader.

Keywords

Problem Context Soft System Methodology Information System Research Electronic Data Interchange Information System Development 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [A90]
    Ambrosio, J. (1990). Soul searching: Four case studies. Computerworld, pages 69–73.Google Scholar
  2. [AWH86]
    Avison & Wood-Harper, A.T.(1986). Multiview—an exploration in information systems development. Australian Computer Journal, 18(4), 174–9.Google Scholar
  3. [B76]
    Boehm B.W. (1976). Software engineering. IEEE Transactions on Computers, C-25(12), 1226–1241.Google Scholar
  4. [B86]
    Brooks Jr., F.P. (1986) No silver bullet: Essence and accidents of software engineering. In H.-J. Kluger, editor, Information Processing’ 86, Amsterdam. Elsevier Science Publishers B.V.Google Scholar
  5. [B87]
    Booch, G. (1987). Software Engineering in Ada. Benjamin Cummings, Menlo Park, 2nd edition.Google Scholar
  6. [B94]
    Booch, G. (1994). Object-Oriented Analysis and Design with Applications. Benjamin Cummings, Redwood City, California, 2nd editionGoogle Scholar
  7. [C81]
    Checkland, P.B. (1981). Systems Thinking, Systems Practice. Wiley, Chichester.Google Scholar
  8. [C89]
    Checkland, P.B. (1989). Soft systems methodology. Human Systems Management, 8(4), 237–289.Google Scholar
  9. [C95]
    Checkland, P.B. (1995). Soft systems methodology and its relevance to the development of information systems. McGraw-Hill Book Company Europe, Berkshire, England.Google Scholar
  10. [C96]
    Chaiyasut P. (1996). Title. PhD thesis, Department of Information Systems, Monash University, P. O. Box 197, Caulfield East, 3161, Australia, (under examination).Google Scholar
  11. [CABDGHJ94]
    Coleman, D. Arnold P., Bodoff S., Dollin C, Gilchrist H., Hayes F. and Jeremaes P. (1994). Object-Oriented Development: The Fusion Method. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs..Google Scholar
  12. [CS90]
    Checkland, P. & Scholes, J. (1990). Soft Systems Methodology in Practice. Wiley, Chichester.Google Scholar
  13. [D79]
    DeMarco, T. (1979). Structured Analysis and System Specification. Yourdon Press, New York.Google Scholar
  14. [D87]
    Dearden, J. (1987). The withering away of the IS organisation. Sloan Management Review, pages 87–91.Google Scholar
  15. [DKRS91]
    Duke, R., King, P., Rose, G., & Smith, G. (1991). The Object-Z specification language: Version 1. Technical Report 91-1, Software Verification Research Centre, Dept. of Computer Science, Univ. of Queensland, Australia.Google Scholar
  16. [F87]
    Foundation, B.C. (1987). Competitive edge applications—myths and realities. Research Report 61, Butler Cox and Partners Limited, London.Google Scholar
  17. [F96]
    Fowler, D.C. (1996). Formal Methods in a Commercial Information Systems Setting: The FOOM Methodology. PhD thesis, Centre for Information Systems Research, Swinburne University of Technology, P. O. Box 218, Hawthorn 3122, Australia, (under examination).Google Scholar
  18. [FS94]
    Fowler, D.C. & Swatman, P.A. (1994). Validating object oriented formal requirements specifications: A description of an action research study. Working Paper 1994-13, Centre for Information Systems Research, Swinburne University of Technology, P. O. Box 218, Hawthorn 3122,Australia.Google Scholar
  19. [FS96]
    Fowler, D.C. & Swatman, P.A. (1996). FOOM—a methodological description. Working paper, Centre for Information Systems Research,Swinburne University of Technology, P. O. Box 218, Hawthorn 3122, Australia, (forthcoming).Google Scholar
  20. [FSS93]
    Fowler, D.C, Swatman, P.A., & Swatman, P.M.C. (1993). Implementing EDI in the public sector: Including formality for enhanced control. In J. Gricar & J. Novak, editors, Strategic Systems in the Global Economy of the 90s, The 6th International Conference on Electronic Data Interchange and Interorganizational Systems, pages 244–256, Kranj, Slovenia. Moderna Organizacija.Google Scholar
  21. [FSW95]
    Fowler, D.C, Swatman, P.A., & Wafula, E.N. (1995). Formal methods in the IS domain: Introducing a notation for presenting Object-Z specifications. Object Oriented Systems, 2(2).Google Scholar
  22. [G90]
    Goodwin, S. (1990). Software integration, systems integrators and the automation process. Manufacturing Systems, pages 64–66.Google Scholar
  23. [H90]
    Hall, A. (1990). Seven myths of formal methods. IEEE Software, 7(5), 11–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. [HM84]
    Horowitz, E. & Munson, J.B. (1984). An expansive view of reusable software. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, SE-10(5), 477–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. [HSE94]
    Henderson-Sellers, B. & Edwards, J.M. (1994). BOOKTWO of Object-Oriented Knowledge: The Working Object. Prentice Hall, Sydney.Google Scholar
  26. [M89]
    Moad, J. (1989). Contracting with integrators. Datamation, pages 18–22.Google Scholar
  27. [M94]
    Morgan, C.C. (1994). Programming from Specifications. Prentice Hall International Series in Computer Science, 2nd edition.Google Scholar
  28. [MW79]
    Mumford, E. & Weir, M. (1979). Computer Systems in Work Design: the ETHICS Method. Associated Business Press.Google Scholar
  29. [R91]
    Radding, A. (1991). Using subcontractors: Outside help is in. Computerworld, pages 57–60.Google Scholar
  30. [RE88]
    Runge, D. & Earl, M. (1988). Gaining competitive advantage from telecommunications. In M. Earl, editor, Information Management: The Strategic Dimension, pages 125–146. Clarendon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  31. [RH88]
    Rouse, R.A. & Hartog, C. (1988). The new MIS professional—part 1. Journal of Systems Management.Google Scholar
  32. [S87]
    Schneider, R.J. (1987). Prototyping toolsets and methodologies: User / developer sociology. In Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.Google Scholar
  33. [S90]
    Stevens, L. (1990). Who does what is a tricky multiple choice. Computerworld, pages 63–67.Google Scholar
  34. [S92a]
    Sommerville, I. (1992). Software Engineering. Addison Wesley, Wokingham, England, 4th edition.Google Scholar
  35. [S92b]
    Stanton, W.A. (1992). Object-Z translator: A tool for the visualisation of object-oriented formal specifications using Object-Z. Honours thesis, Department of Computer Science, Curtin University of Technology, G. P. O. Box U1987, Perth 6001, Australia.Google Scholar
  36. [S92c]
    Swatman, P.A. (1992). Increasing Formality in the Specification of High-Quality Information Systems in a Commercial Context. PhD thesis, Curtin University of Technology, School of Computing, Perth, Western Australia.Google Scholar
  37. [S93]
    Swatman, P.A. (1993). Using formal specifications in the acquisition of information systems: Educating information systems professionals. In J.P. Bowen & J.E. Nicholls, editors, Z User Workshop: London 1992, Workshops in Computing, pages 205–239. Springer Verlag, London.Google Scholar
  38. [S96]
    Shanks G. (1996). Using and Understanding Corporate Data Models: A Case Study of an Australian Bank. Working paper, Department of Information Systems, Monash University, P. O. Box 197, Caulfield East, 3161, Australia. (Submitted for publication).Google Scholar
  39. [SFG92]
    Swatman, P.A., Fowler, D.C., & Gan, C.Y.M. (1992). Extending the useful application domain for formal methods. In J.E. Nicholls, editor, Z User Workshop: York 1991, Workshops in Computing. Springer Verlag, London.Google Scholar
  40. [SM86]
    Sprague, R.H. & McNurlin, B.C. (1986). Information Systems Management in Practice. Prentice-Hall International Editions, New Jersey.Google Scholar
  41. [SS90]
    Swatman, P.A. & Swatman, P.M.C. (1990). The software reusability issue: Perspectives from software engineering and information systems. In Proceedings of the 1st Australian Conference on Information Systems.Google Scholar
  42. [SS92a]
    Swatman, P.A. & Swatman, P.M.C. (1992). Formal specification: An analytic tool for (management) information systems. Journal of Information Systems, 2(2), 121–160.Google Scholar
  43. [SS92b]
    Swatman, P.A. & Swatman, P.M.C. (1992). Managing the formal specification of information systems. In Proceeding of the International Conference on Organization and Information Systems, Bled, Slovania.Google Scholar
  44. [SS92c]
    Swatman, P.M.C. & Swatman, P.A. (1992). EDI systems integration: A definition and literature survey. Information Society Journal, 8(3).Google Scholar
  45. [SSD91]
    Swatman, P.A., Swatman, P.M.C., & Duke, R. (1991). Electronic Data Interchange: A high-level formal specification in Object-Z. In P.A. Bailes, editor, 6th Australian Software Engineering Conference (ASWEC’91): Engineering Safe Software, Sydney, NSW.Google Scholar
  46. [SSE90]
    Swatman, P.A., Swatman, P.M.C, & Everett, J.E. (1990). Stages of growth of an innovative software house: An additional criterion for software package selection. Australian Computer Journal, 22(3), 81–91.Google Scholar
  47. [T94]
    Tan, C.H. (1994). The design of the FOOM workbench. Honours thesis, School of Computing, Curtin University of Technology, G. P. O. Box U1987, Perth 6001, Australia.Google Scholar
  48. [VK90]
    Vinton, R. & Knight, F. (1990). Systems integration: Sharing risks and responsibilities.Google Scholar
  49. [W90]
    Wing, J.M. (1990). A specifier’s introduction to formal methods. IEEE Computer, 23(9), 8–24. Business Communications Review, 20(10), 18–23.Google Scholar
  50. [W94]
    Wan, L. (1994). A prototype syntax directed editor for Object-Z. Honours thesis, School of Computing, Curtin University of Technology, G. P. O. Box U1987, Perth 6001, Australia.Google Scholar
  51. [W95]
    Wafula, E.N. (1995). Graphical representation of Object-Z specifications using MOSES. MBus thesis, Centre for Information Systems Research, Swinburne University of Technology, P. O. Box 218, Hawthorn 3122, Australia.Google Scholar
  52. [WHAA85]
    Wood-Harper, A.T., Anthill, L., & Avison, D.E. (1985). Information Systems Definition: The Multiview Approach. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford.Google Scholar
  53. [WS95a]
    Wafula, E.N. & Swatman, P.A. (1995). FOOM: A diagrammatic illustration of inter-object communication in Object-Z specifications. In Proceedings of 3rd Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference APSEC’95, Brisbane, Queensland.Google Scholar
  54. [WS95b]
    Wafula, E.N. & Swatman, P.A. (1995). Merging FOOM and MOSES: A semantic mapping from Object-Z to structural object-oriented diagrams. In Proceedings of the 6th Australasian Conference on Information Systems (ACIS’95).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Paul Swatman
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre for Information Systems ResearchSwinburne University of TechnologyHawthornAustralia

Personalised recommendations