Skip to main content

Viewpoints for knowledge management in system design

  • Chapter

Abstract

Managing knowledge involved in the design process of a new artefact is discussed starting from the principle to regard each actor of the process as the stakeholder of a particular viewpoint on the object to be. The two concepts of Viewpoint and of Correlation of Viewpoints are considered from a semiotic angle in that dealing with conditions an actor gives some sense to the object to be, as opposed to a semantic or ontological view which postulates that the object has a sense in itself. The semiotic approach on the one hand, and the synthesis of an experiment, on the other hand, give means to establish that the intuitive concepts of Viewpoint and Correlation of Viewpoints fall under a paradigm, called the Viewpoint Paradigm. The basis of this paradigm is stated as follows: the sense of an object to be designed consists of the integration of the viewpoints which are exerted on it. Two computerized models of Viewpoint and Correlation of Viewpoints are presented. The first aims at recognizing viewpoints and their correlations starting from the written documents produced during the design process. The second supports the definition of evolution indicators of the design process by means of a logical framework in which each viewpoint is associated with a knowledge-based system.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Deledalle, G. (1990). Lire Peirce aujourd’hui [Coll. Le point philosophique]. Paris: De Boeck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Easterbrook, S. M., Finkelstein, A. C. W., Kramer, J., & Nuseibeh, B. A. (1994). Coordinating distributed viewpoints: The anatomy of a consistency check. Journal of Concurrent Engineering: Research and Applications [Special issue on conflict management], 2(3), 209–222. West Bloomfield, MI: CERA Institute/ Technomic Publishing Company Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eco, U. (1973). Segno. Milano: ISEDI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finkelstein, A. C. W., & Fuks, H. (1989). Multi-party specification. In Proc 5th International Workshop on Software Specification & Design (pp. 185–196). Pittsburgh, PA: IEEE CS. Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Galarreta, D., Charrel, P.J., Orel, T. Rothenburger, B., Trousse, B., & Vogel C. (1998). Study of dynamic viewpoints in satellite design. In Proceedings of the 9 th Symposium IFAC Information COntrol in Manufacturing systems INCOM’98, Nancy, June 24–26, volume 3 (pp. 204–208).

    Google Scholar 

  • Greimas, A. J. (1966). Sémantique structurale. Paris: Larousse.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kontonya, G. & Sommerville, I. (1992). Viewpoints for requirements definition. IEEE Software Engineering Journal, 7, 375–387.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leite, J. C. S. P. & Freeman, P. A. (1991). Requirements validation through viewpoint resolution. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 17(12), 1253–1269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leite, J. C. S. P. (1988). Viewpoint resolution in requirements elicitation. Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of California Irvine.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morin, E. (19991). La complexité humaine [Coll. Champs l’Essentiel]. Paris: Flammarion.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mullery, G. P. (1979). CORE — a method for controlled requirement specifications. Proceedings of the 4 th International Conference on Software Engineering (pp. 126–135). München, Germany: IEEE CS Press,.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nuseibeh, B. A., Kramer, J., & Finkelstein, A. C. W. (1994). Expressing the relationships between multiple views in requirements specification. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 20(10), 760–773.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peirce, C. S. (1932). Collected papers. Harvard U.P.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rumbaugh, J., Jacobson, I., & Booch, G. (1999). The unified modeling language reference manual. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zave, P. (1997). Classification of Research efforts in Requirement Engineering. Computing Surveys, 29(4), 315–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2003 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Charrel, PJ. (2003). Viewpoints for knowledge management in system design. In: Gazendam, H.W.M., Jorna, R.J., Cijsouw, R.S. (eds) Dynamics and Change in Organizations. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0161-8_13

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0161-8_13

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-94-010-3986-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-010-0161-8

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics