Advertisement

Towards Method Engineering of Model-Driven User Interface Development

  • Kênia Sousa
  • Hildeberto Mendonça
  • Jean Vanderdonckt
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4849)

Abstract

Model-driven user interface development environments and their associated methodologies have evolved over time to become more explicit, flexible, and reusable but they still lack to reach a level that allows tailoring a method to the reality of software development organizations and their projects. In order to address this shortcoming, method engineering provides strategies to define and tailor software engineering methods. They should address any usability concerns, which are primordial for the integration of model-driven user interface development methods in the competitive reality of software organizations. To address the issues of explicitly defining a flexible method, we defined a strategy based on method engineering for model-driven user interface development that uses usability goals as a starting point. With the application of this strategy, we aim to help method engineers executing the method with more efficiency when defining or tailoring methods and facilitate the application of model-based user interface development methods in software organizations.

Keywords

model-driven user interface development methodologies method engineering business process modeling usability 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Aizenbud-Reshef, N., Nolan, B.T., Rubin, J., Shaham-Gafni, Y.: Model traceability. IBM Systems Journal 45(3), 515–526 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ayed, M.B., Ralyte, J., Rolland, C.: Constructing the Lyee method with a method engineering approach. Knowledge-Based Systems 17(7-8), 239–248 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Barclay, P.J., Griffiths, T., McKirdy, J., Kennedy, J.B., Cooper, R., Paton, N.W., Gray, P.: Teallach - a flexible user-interface development environment for object database applications. Journal of Visual Language and Computing 14(1), 47–77 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    BEA Systems, IBM Corporation, Microsoft Corporation, SAP AG, Siebel Systems: Business Process Execution Language for Web Services, V1.1 (May 2003) Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bodart, F., Hennebert, A.-M., Leheureux, J.-M., Vanderdonckt, J.: Computer-Aided Window Identification in Trident. In: Nordbyn, K., Helmersen, P.H., Gilmore, D.J., Arnesen, S.A. (eds.) Proc. of 5th IFIP TC 13 Int. Conf. on Human-Computer Interaction Interact 1995, Lillehammer, July 1995, pp. 331–336. Chapman & Hall, London (1995)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Botterweck, G., Hampe, J.F.: Capturing the Requirements for Multiple User Interfaces. In: Proc. of 11th Australian Workshop on Requirements Engineering AWRE 2006, Adelaide, December 9, 2006, Univ. of South Australia (2006)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Brinkkemper, S.: Method engineering: Engineering of information systems development methods and tools. Information Software Technology 38(4), 275–280 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Brinkkemper, S., Saeki, M., Harmsen, F.: Meta-Modelling Based Assembly Techniques for Situational Method Engineering. Information Systems 24(3), 209–228 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Brown, A.W., Iyengar, S., Johnston, S.: A Rational approach to model-driven development. IBM Systems Journal 45(3), 463–480 (2006)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Calvary, G., Coutaz, J., Thevenin, D., Limbourg, Q., Bouillon, L., Vanderdonckt, J.: A Unifying Reference Framework for Multi-Target User Interfaces. Interacting with Computers 15(3), 289–308 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Costa, D., Nóbrega, L., Nunes, N.: An MDA Approach for Generating Web Interfaces with UML ConcurTaskTrees and Canonical Abstract Prototypes. In: Proc. of 5th Int. Workshop on Task Models and Diagrams for user interface design Tamodia 2006. LNCS, vol. 4385, pp. 95–102. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fensel, D., Lausen, H., Polleres, A., Bruijn, J., Stollberg, M., Roman, D., Domingue, J.: Enabling Semantic Web Services - The Web Service Modeling Ontology. Springer, Berlin (2007)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ferré, X., Juristo, N., Moreno, A.M.: Framework for Integrating Usability Practices into the Software Process. In: PROFES 2005. Proc. of 6th Int. Conf. on Product Focused Software Process Improvement, Oulu, June 13-18, 2005. LNCS, vol. 3547, pp. 202–215. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Furtado, E., Furtado, J.J.V., Silva, W.B., Rodrigues, D.W.T., Taddeo, L.S., Limbourg, Q., Vanderdonckt, J.: An Ontology-Based Method for Universal Design of User Interfaces. In: Seffah, A., Radhakrishnan, T., Canals, G. (eds.) Proc. of Workshop on Multiple User Interfaces over the Internet: Engineering and Applications Trends MUI 2001 (Lille, September 10, 2001)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Göransson, B., Gulliksen, J., Boivie, I.: The usability design process - integrating user-centered systems design in the software development process. Software Process: Improvement and Practice 8(2), 111–131 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Griffiths, T., Barclay, P.J., McKirdy, J., Paton, N.W., Gray, P.D., Kennedy, J.B., Cooper, R., Goble, C.A., West, A., Smyth, M.: Teallach: A Model-Based User Interface Development Environment for Object Databases. In: Proc. of UIDIS 1999, pp. 86–96. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (1999)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Grundy, J.C., Venable, J.R.: Towards an integrated environment for method engineering. In: Proc. of IFIP WG 8.1 Conf. on method Engineering, pp. 45–62. Chapman and Hall, Sydney, Australia (1996)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hailpern, B., Tarr, P.: Model-driven development: The good, the bad, and the ugly. IBM Systems Journal 45(3), 451–461 (2006)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Harmsen, F.: Situational Method Engineering. Moret Ernst & Young Management Consultants (1997)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Juristo, N., López, M., Moreno, A.M., Sánchez-Segura, M.I.: Improving software usability through architectural patterns. In: ICSE Workshop on SE-HCI 2003, pp. 12–19 (2003)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kruchten, Ph.: The Rational Unified Process - An Introduction. Addison-Wesley, New Jersey (2000)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Limbourg, Q., Vanderdonckt, J.: UsiXML: A User Interface Description Language Sup-Porting Multiple Levels of Independence. In: Matera, M., Comai, S. (eds.) Engineering Advanced Web Applications, pp. 325–338. Rinton Press, Paramus (2004)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Mayhew, D.: The Usability Engineering Lifecycle - A Practitioner’s Handbook for User Interface Design. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Francisco (1999)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    OMG, Business Process Modeling Notation Specification, V1.0 (February 2006) Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    OMG, Software Process Engineering Metamodel Specification, V2.0 (February 2007) Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Rosenbaum, S., Rohn, J.A., Humburg, J.: A toolkit for strategic usability: Results from Workshops, Panels and Surveys. In: Proc. of ACM Conf. on Human Factors in Computing Systems Proceedings CHI 2000, pp. 337–344. ACM Press, NY (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Saeki, M.: Came: The first step to automated software engineering. In: Proc. of the OOPSLA 2003 Workshop on Process Engineering for Object-Oriented and Component-Based Development, pp. 7–18 (2003)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Sinnig, D., Gaffar, A., Reichart, D., Seffah, A., Forbrig, P.: Patterns in Model-Based Engineering. In: Proc. of CADUI 2004, pp. 195–208. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (2004)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Si-Said, S., Rolland, C., Grosz, G., MENTOR,: A Computer Aided Requirements Engineering Environment. In: Constantopoulos, P., Vassiliou, Y., Mylopoulos, J. (eds.) CAiSE 1996. LNCS, vol. 1080, pp. 22–43. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Vanderdonckt, J.: A MDA-Compliant Environment for Developing User Interfaces of Information Systems. In: Pastor, Ó., Falcão e Cunha, J. (eds.) CAiSE 2005. LNCS, vol. 3520, pp. 16–31. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Visual Paradigm. Business Process Visual Architect. Available at: http://www.visual-paradigm.com/product/bpva/
  32. 32.
    Wolff, A., Forbrig, P., Dittmar, A., Reichart, D.: Linking GUI elements to tasks: supporting an evolutionary design process. In: Proc. of TAMODIA 2005, pp. 27–34. ACM Press, New York (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Zhang, Z., Lyytinen, K.: A Framework for Component Reuse in a Metamodelling-Based Software Development. Requirements Engineering 6(2), 116–131 (2001)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kênia Sousa
    • 1
  • Hildeberto Mendonça
    • 1
  • Jean Vanderdonckt
    • 1
  1. 1.Université catholique de Louvain, IAG-Louvain School of Management, Information Systems Unit (ISYS), Place de Doyens 1, B-1348 Louvain-La-NeuveBelgium

Personalised recommendations