SDMS Project PhaseⅠ

Duk-Jin KimTu PengYan Shi

Agenda

Introduction Why?-Enterprise Requirements What?-System Functional Requirements How?-System Non-Functional Requirements Prototype Next step

Introduction

Process

ROLES

Understandproblem

Establishoutline

requirements

Selectprototyping

system

Developprototype

Evaluateprototype

ACTIONS

Req. engineerDomain expert

End-user

Req. engineerEnd-user

Softwareengineer

Project manager

Req. engineerSoftwareengineer

End-userDomain expertReq. engineer

Software engineer

for prototypingfor prototyping [Kotonya&Sommerville98]

All three members in our team play the following roles: Requirement Engineers Project Managers Software Engineers Domain Experts End Users

Introduction

Roles

Enterprise Req.

Real World Problems

Communication Complexity Schedule Meeting Date Complexity Schedule Meeting Location

Complexity Time Consuming Job Conflict Between Date and Location

Enterprise Req.

Existing System

www.meetingwizard.com Communication Overhead No Automation in Scheduling Date Internet-Dependent System

Enterprise Req.

System Goal

Provide Communication Solution Provide Automated Scheduling

Enterprise Req.

Preliminary Understanding

Any related system? User roles?

e.g. Active, important,.. Location and date conflict? Any unstated problem?

e.g Cancellation,.. Development cost?

Enterprise Req.

Issues

Enterprise Req.

Improved Understanding

Stakeholders

Enterprise Req.

Improved Understanding

FRs & NFRs - Setting Date

Enterprise Req.

Improved Understanding

FRs & NFRs - Setting Location

Enterprise Req.

Improved Understanding

FRs & NFRs - Canceling Meeting

Date conflict Opt1: extends the date range Opt2: remove some dates from the

exclusion set Opt3: remove some participants Opt4: add new date to the preference

set.

Enterprise Req.

Conflict

Location conflict Opt1: Preferred by many participants.

e.g over 70% of participants.. Opt2: Preferred by many important

participants. Opt3: Initiator’s choice

Enterprise Req.

Conflict(cont.)

Location and Date conflict Opt1: Initiator’s choice

Enterprise Req.

Conflict(cont.)

System Functional Req.

Preliminary Understanding

Monitor Meeting

Plan Meeting

Re-plan Meeting

Conflict Resolution

Interaction Management

Exclusion Set Modification

Preference set Modification

Preferred Location Modification

External Constraints Changes

Bounds on Re-planning

Resolution Policies

SDMS

Clients

Communicate Requests

Get Replies from Participants

Inform Participants about schedules&changes

operation information stakeholder

include

depend on

Is the system available to everyone? Does every user play the same role? Solution: Add a Login/Logoff module to set the

users’ authorization level. Users with different authorization level have different constraints to using the system. How to monitor meetings ?

System Functional Req.

Issues

How to monitor meetings is not mentioned in the functional requirement. Option 1: When having a virtual meeting in a

distributed manner, every participant should have his/her status, for example, giving presentation, online/offline, etc, displayed publicly so that every participant can see it.

Option 2: Since this requirement is ambiguous, we can just consider it as not part of the system’s core functions and dispose it.

Solution: Option 1 Reason: Enhance the functionality of the

system.

System Functional Req.

Issues

What kind of constraints expressed by participants should the meeting initiator consider? How to derive these constraints? Option 1: Design a sub-module within the

meeting plan module to derive all kinds of constraints from participants.

Option 2: Get the exclusion set and preference set from the interaction management module and use them as constraints.

Solution: Option 2. Reason: Decrease the redundancy of the

system, and exclusion set and preference set are enough for the initial planning of a meeting.

System Functional Req.

Issues

System Functional Req.

Issues

What does the “Client” refer to in the statement “Support conflict resolution according to resolution policies stated by the client.”? Option 1: system administrator Option 2: meeting initiator Solution: Both Option 1 and Option 2 Reason: System administrator should have the

predominate decisions on resolution policies. In the meantime, meeting initiator’s opinion also weighs.

System Functional Req.

Improved Understanding

Monitor Meeting

Plan Meeting

Re-plan Meeting

Conflict Resolution

Interaction Management

Exclusion Set Modification

Preference set Modification

Preferred Location Modification

External Constraints Changes

Bounds on Re-planning

Resolution Policies

SDMS

Initiator

Communicate Requests

Get Replies from Participants

Inform Participants about schedules&changes

operation information stakeholder

include

depend on

Exclusion Set

Preference Set

Admini-strator

Login/Logoff

User Authorization

level

Display Participant’s

status publicly

System Non-Functional Req.

Preliminary and Improved

System Non-Functional Req.

Issues

ambiguity What is typical ways of managing meeting is

very unclear. What does “monitor meeting” mean is unclear. Dynamically and flexibilities also are unclear.

omission Can’t understand “explicit”

other accurately and nomadcity are controversial .

System Non-Functional Req.

Priority of the NFRs

1 Manage 1 Replanning 1 Reuse 2 Variation 2 Requesting 2 Determinate 2 Communication 2 Communicate via Internet 2 Privacy 3 Monitor 3 Handle

Demo Mock Up.

Login

Demo Mock Up.

New Meeting

Demo Mock Up.

Propose Date

Demo Mock Up.

Important Notice

All examples come from www.meetingwizard.com. Actually system may be different.

Next Step

Further improvement of ER & SR Developing the prototype

Thank You!

Duck-Jin KimTu PengYan Shi

Sep 2006