Detailed design


Task

  1. Vision (30 marks)

Analyse the case study and produce a Vision document for a software system to solve the business issue identified in the case study (use template provided in Resources section).

The Vision document should address the following points:

  1. a) It should spell out the business case for development of the proposed system, identifying both the problem it is intended to solve, and the benefits to be expected from solving it.
  2. b) It should identify all the stakeholders relevant to the system and their interest in it.
  3. c) It should identify the key needs the system should satisfy and the key features by which the proposed system will satisfy those needs.
  4. d) It should identify key qualities and characteristics that the system should exhibit
  5. e) It should identify key considerations and constraints which affect the technical solution to be developed.

 

  1. Use Case Model (30 marks) 

Analyse the case study to determine the high level functional requirements for the new system. Express your understanding of those requirements with:

  1. a) A use case diagram capturing at least all critical and significant use cases that the system will have to support
  2. b) A document containing short use case descriptions for the use cases identified in the use case diagram.

 

  1. Domain Model (20 marks)

Analyse the case study to determine the classes required to express the problem domains structure and operation. Express your understanding of the problem domain in:

  1. a) A domain model.

 

  1. State Machine (20 marks)

Analyse the lifecycle and behaviour of the most complex stateful object* identified in your domain model and express its behaviour in:

  1. a) A state machine diagram

*Note: a list of appropriate domain objects will be made available during semester. Please contact the lecturer to confirm your selection if you wish to complete this task before that list is available.

Rationale

To demonstrate taught concepts and exercise skills related to the Requirements discipline.

Marking criteria

Vision
Criteria Fail Pass Credit Distinction High Distinction
How well does the Vision document address its intended purpose? Generally described by the following characteristics:

Difficult to discern actual purpose of proposed system

Business problem identified as lack of technical solution

Generally described by the following characteristics:

Business case is addressed in non-technical terms and captures the business value of the proposed system.

Communicates fundamental ‘why’ of proposed system

 

All Pass requirements plus:

Needs expressed in business terms.

Features refer to software characteristics that support business needs.

Communicates fundamental ‘what’ of proposed system.

All Credit requirements plus:

All stakeholders and their interests clearly identified and defined.

Most important non-functional requirements identified and described in ‘other product requirements’

All Distinction requirements plus:

Needs consistent with functional requirements as expressed in use case model.

Well presented, correctly spelled, correct grammar.

 

 

Use Case Model
Criteria Fail Pass Credit Distinction High Distinction
How well does the Use Case Model address its intended purpose?

 

Generally described by the following characteristics:

Use Case model largely incomplete.

Incorrect concept of use cases demonstrated.

Short use case descriptions missing, largely incomplete, or generally wrong.

Presentation poor, bad spelling and poor grammar in use case descriptions.

Generally described by the following characteristics:

Correct concept of ‘end-goal’ use cases demonstrated.

Some critical or significant use cases identified, many missing.

Some use cases inappropriately named.

Some important/obvious external actors identified, many missing or misidentified.

Short use case descriptions incomplete, or poorly described.

Short use case descriptions generally consistent with use case diagram.

Generally described by the following characteristics:

Correct concept of ‘end-goal’ use cases demonstrated.

Most critical and significant use cases identified.

Use cases correctly named with short imperative action statements.

Most important external actors identified.

Generally correct UML syntax.

Short use case descriptions provided for all critical and significant use cases.

Short use case descriptions consistent with use case diagram.

Generally described by the following characteristics:

All critical and significant use cases identified

Other necessary but minor use cases identified.

All external actors identified, including external systems and events.

Common elements of end-goal use cases factored out into ‘sub-function’ uses cases.

Generally correct use of <<includes>> and <<extends>> relationships.

Short use case descriptions provided for all identified use cases.

All Distinction requirements plus:

Fully correct UML syntax.

Fully correct use of <<includes>> and <<extends>> relationships.

Use cases consistent with needs and features as expressed in Vision

Well-presented use case diagram.

Short use case descriptions correctly spelled, with correct grammar.

 

Domain Model
Criteria Fail Pass Credit Distinction High Distinction
How well does the Domain Model address its intended purpose? Generally described by the following characteristics:

Incorrect concept of domain objects demonstrated.

Domain model includes application concepts such as databases and user interfaces.

Domain model largely incomplete.

Generally described by the following characteristics:

Correct concept of domain objects demonstrated.

No application concepts such as databases or user interfaces present in domain model.

Some critical or significant domain objects identified, many missing.

Some relationships between domain objects shown, many incorrect.

All Pass requirements plus:

Most critical or significant domain objects identified, some missing.

Relationships between domain objects generally correct.

Generally correct UML syntax.

 

All Credit requirements plus:

All critical and significant domain objects identified

Correct concept of inheritance shown (if appropriate)

All Distinction requirements plus:

Necessary but minor domain objects shown.

Correct concept of aggregation/composition shown (if appropriate)

Fully correct UML syntax.

Well-presented domain class diagram.

 

 

 

State Machine

Criteria Fail Pass Credit  Distinction High Distinction
How well does the State Machine Diagram address its intended purpose? Generally described by the following characteristics:

Incorrect concept of states and transitions demonstrated.

State machine largely incomplete.

Generally described by the following characteristics:

Generally correct concept of states and transitions demonstrated.

All Pass requirements plus:

Generally correct representation of required states and transitions.

All Credit requirements plus:

Fully correct representation of required states and transitions.

States and transitions correctly labelled.

All Distinction requirements plus:

Correct understanding of guard conditions demonstrated (if appropriate)

Correct UML syntax.

Well-presented state machine diagram.

 

Assessment item 2

Assignment 2 – Analysis

Value: 20%

Due date: 11-Sep-2015

Return date: 02-Oct-2015

Submission method options

Alternative submission method

Task

 

  1. Full Use Case Description (40 marks)

Select the most critical core use case identified for the case study* and fully describe it to produce a full use case description. (use the template provided in Resources section).

Make sure your full use case description identifies and describes all significant alternate flows

Guidance for selecting a use case will be provided during semester. If you wish to start this task before such guidance is provided, check your selection with the lecturer before starting work. Your mark for the whole assignment will be negatively affected if the use case you select is not one of the approved use cases.

 

  1. Activity Diagram (20 marks)

Produce an activity diagram consistent with the full use case description. Make sure your activity diagram shows the same steps and flows as contained in the full use case description.

 

  1. System Sequence Diagram (20 marks)

Produce a system sequence diagram consistent with the normal flow detailed in the full use case description.

 

  1. Operation Contract (20 marks)

Identify the most complex user-system interaction (input/response couplet) within the normal flow (ie the step with the most number of side effects, or most complex internal logic), and produce an operation contract for that input-response couplet.

It is impossible to provide guidance as to which step of the use case to select for this task. However, your mark for this section will be negatively affected if the step you select is clearly not the most complex interaction in the use case you describe.
Rationale

To demonstrate taught concepts and exercise skills related to the Analysis discipline.

Marking criteria

Full Use Case Description
Criteria Fail Pass Credit Distinction High Distinction
How well does the full use description address its intended purpose? Generally described by the following characteristics:

Does not break use case down into sequence of user-system interactions.

 

Generally described by the following characteristics:

Clearly shows a sequence of user-system interactions that results in satisfaction of user end-goal.

 

 

All Pass requirements plus:

Consistent with actions described or required in case study.

Most significant alternate flows correctly identified and described.

 

All Credit requirements plus:

Short use case description clear and succinct.

Pre and post conditions correctly identified.

 

All Distinction requirements plus:

Interactions with different external actors differentiated (if appropriate)

Non-functional requirements (if any) clearly specified

Correct use of sub-flows (if appropriate)

Well presented, correctly spelled, correct grammar.

 

Activity Diagram
Criteria Fail Pass Credit Distinction High Distinction
How well does the activity diagram address its intended purpose?

 

Generally described by the following characteristics:

Inconsistent with full use case description.

 

Generally described by the following characteristics:

Generally correct concept of actions and flows demonstrated.

Generally consistent with full use case description.

All Pass requirements plus:

Consistent with case study.

All Credit requirements plus:

Swim lanes identified for all external actors involved.

 

 

All Distinction requirements plus:

Fully correct UML syntax.

Clear and well-presented diagram.

 

 

System Sequence Diagram
Criteria Fail Pass Credit Distinction High Distinction
How well does the system sequence diagram address its intended purpose? Generally described by the following characteristics:

Inconsistent with full use case description.

Generally described by the following characteristics:

Generally correct concept of lifelines and messages demonstrated.

Generally consistent with full use case description.

 

All Pass requirements plus:

Consistent with case study

Generally correct UML syntax.

 

 

All Credit requirements plus:

‘Data freight’ of messages correctly identified, and clearly shown.

Interactions with all external systems shown (if appropriate).

 

All Distinction requirements plus:

Fully correct UML syntax

Clear and well-presented diagram.

 

 

 

 

Operation Contract

Criteria Fail Pass Credit  Distinction High Distinction
How well does the operation contract address its intended purpose? Generally described by the following characteristics:

Incorrect concept of system operation demonstrated.

Generally described by the following characteristics:

Generally correct concept of system operation demonstrated.

Generally consistent with full use case description and SSD.

All Pass requirements plus:

Operation signature clearly defined and generally correct.

All Credit requirements plus:

Pre and post conditions correctly identified and defined

Side effects correctly identified and described

 

All Distinction requirements plus:

Operation logic (decision table) clearly and correctly defined

 

 

Assessment item 3

Assignment 3 – Architecture

Value: 20%

Due date: 25-Sep-2015

Return date: 16-Oct-2015

Submission method options

Alternative submission method

Task

  1. System Wide (Non-Functional) Requirements (30 marks)
  2. a) Analysis of NFRs (10 marks)

Analyse the Case Study documents and determine the non-functional requirements (NFRs) or system quality attributes necessary to meet the needs identified in the Case Study. Consider the case study against the checklist provided in the Resources/Asg3 section of the subject website. Prioritise the identified relevant NFRs, and specifically identify the 3-5 most important. For each of these high priority NFRs identify both benefit it confers and the cost of supporting it.

  1. b) System Wide Requirement Document (20 marks)

Document and expand your analysis in a System Wide Requirement document. Use the System Wide Requirement Specification template provided in the Resources/Assignment 2 section of the subject Interact site. Make sure your SWRS document addresses:

  1. i) System wide services(required system functionality not captured by a single use case) These are the ‘F’ of FURPS+: e.g. auditing, printing, authentication).
  2. ii) Non-functional requirements(system qualities). These are the URPS of FURPS+. Identify the specific NFRs you considered relevant from the checklist under the general URPS+ categories.

iii) Any required system interfaces with external systems.

  1. iv) Any business rulesthat must be applied.
  2. v) Any constraintsthat will affect the design of the system. (Interfaces and constraints are the ‘+’ of FURPS+)

 

  1. Architecture Notebook (40 marks)

Analyse the Case Study documents and develop a candidate architecture to meet the functional and non-functional requirements you have identified in Assignment 1 and the system wide requirements identified in Task 1. Document this candidate architecture in an Architectural Notebook. Use the template provided in the Resources/Assignment 2 section of the subject Interact site. Make sure the architectural notebook addresses:

  1. i) The key concerns driving the overall architecture. (These should correspond with the 3-5 most important NFRs you identified.)
  2. ii) Any assumptions and dependencies that affect the architecture.

iii) Any architecturally significant requirements. (E.g. a requirement for persistent data may require access to a database)

  1. iv) Decisions, constraints, and justifications that shape the architecture.
  2. v) Architectural mechanisms used to implement requirements (e.g a database or XML file to implement a persistence requirement)
  3. vi) Any architectural frameworks or patterns that will be applied

 

  1. Component Diagram (15 marks)

Document your proposed architecture with a high level logical view showing functional and technical components in a component diagram.

 

  1. Deployment Diagram (15 marks)

Document how your proposed architecture maps to the intended deployment environment with a deployment diagram showing how your functional and technical components will be distributed over hardware nodes.

Rationale

To demonstrate taught concepts and exercise skills related to the Architecture discipline.

Marking criteria

System Wide (Non-Functional) Requirements
Criteria Fail Pass Credit Distinction High Distinction
How well does the analysis of non-functional requirements address its intended purpose? Generally described by the following characteristics:

Consideration of NFRs unrelated to case study.

No prioritization of NFRs.

No consideration of costs or benefits.

Generally described by the following characteristics:

Consideration of NFRs generalized and superficial.

Prioritisation only vaguely related to needs of case study.

Costs and benefits generalized.

Generally described by the following characteristics:

Consideration of NFRs generalized.

Prioritisation generally related to needs of case study.

Costs and benefits generalized.

Generally described by the following characteristics:

Consideration of NFRs detailed and specific.

Prioritisation clearly and correctly reflects needs of case study.

Costs and benefits clearly identified and relevant to case study.

All Distinction requirements plus:

Both runtime and non-runtime quality characteristics considered.

 

 

How well does the system wide requirement document address its intended purpose? Generally described by the following characteristics:

System wide services not identified or mainly incorrect.

NFRs addressed only superficially. Unrelated to prior analysis.

No external interfaces identified, or identified incorrectly.

No or very few business rules identified.

No constraints identified or identified incorrectly.

Generally described by the following characteristics:

Some system wide services identified, many missing.

Some NFRs addressed but unrelated to prior analysis.

Some external interfaces identified.

Some business rules identified.

Some constraints identified.

Generally described by the following characteristics:

Most system wide services identified, some missing.

Most critical and significant NFRs addressed and related to prior analysis.

Most critical and significant external interfaces identified.

Most business rules identified.

Most constraints identified.

Generally described by the following characteristics:

All system wide services identified, some missing.

All critical and significant NFRs addressed and related to prior analysis.

All critical and significant external interfaces identified.

All critical and significant business rules identified.

All critical and significant constraints identified.

All Distinction requirements plus:

Detailed and thorough consideration of all aspects of SWR document.

Well presented, correctly spelled, correct grammar.

 

Architecture Notebook
Criteria Fail Pass Credit Distinction High Distinction
How well does the architecture notebook address its intended purpose?

 

Generally described by the following characteristics:

Goals and philosophies not explained, and not consistent NFRs.

Architecturally significant requirements not identified or incorrectly identified.

Decisions and constraints either not discussed or arbitrary.

Architectural mechanisms not identified or unrelated to requirements.

Framework/architectural style arbitrary and inappropriate to case study.

Generally described by the following characteristics:

Goals and philosophies poorly explained, and inconsistent with high priority NFRs.

Some (1-2) critical architecturally significant requirements identified but implications not explained.

Few (1-2) decisions and constraints identified. Consistent with case study identified, but poorly justified.

Few (1-2) or no architectural mechanisms identified.

Framework/architectural style generally appropriate to case study.

 

Generally described by the following characteristics:

Goals and philosophies explained, and generally consistent with high priority NFRs.

Most critical architecturally significant requirements correctly identified and implications briefly explained.

Several (3-4) decisions and constraints identified. Consistent with case study, sensible, and justified.

Several (3-4) architectural mechanisms identified, related to architecturally significant requirements.

Framework/architectural style sensible and appropriate to case study.

Generally described by the following characteristics:

Goals and philosophies well explained, and consistent with high priority NFRs.

All critical architecturally significant requirements correctly identified and implications explained.

Many (>4) decisions and constraints identified. Consistent with case study, sensible, and well justified.

Many (>4) architectural mechanisms identified, related to architecturally significant requirements.

Framework/architectural style sensible and appropriate to case study.

All Distinction requirements plus:

Detailed and thorough consideration of all aspects of Architecture Notebook.

Well presented, correctly spelled, correct grammar.

 

 

 

Component Diagram
Criteria Fail Pass Credit Distinction High Distinction
How well does the component diagram address its intended purpose? Generally described by the following characteristics:

Functional and technical components arbitrary and unrelated to functional and non-functional requirements of the case study.

Associations between components arbitrary and do not support communication needs of use case workflows.

Generally described by the following characteristics:

Functional and technical components somewhat consistent with functional and non-functional requirements of the case study. Many requirements not addressed.

Associations between components generally sensible. Many inconsistencies in supporting communication needs of use case workflows.

Generally described by the following characteristics:

Functional and technical components generally consistent with functional and non-functional requirements of the case study.

Associations between components sensible. Generally supports communication needs of use case workflows, some inconsistencies.

 

Generally described by the following characteristics:

Functional and technical components consistent with functional and non-functional requirements of the case study.

Associations between components sensible and support communication needs of use case workflows.

 

All Distinction requirements plus:

Consistent with all other elements of the assignment.

Fully correct UML syntax

Clear and well-presented diagram.

 

 

 

 

 

Deployment Diagram

Criteria Fail Pass Credit  Distinction High Distinction
How well does the operation contract address its intended purpose? Generally described by the following characteristics:

Physical node layout not consistent with the case study.

Design does not support functional and non-functional requirements of the case study.
Communication protocols between nodes not identified.

Generally described by the following characteristics:

Physical node layout somewhat consistent of the case study.

Design supports some functional and non-functional requirements of the case study.

Some communication protocols between nodes identified.

 

Generally described by the following characteristics:

Physical node layout generally consistent with the case study.

Design supports most functional and non-functional requirements of the case study.

Most communication protocols between nodes correctly identified.

Generally described by the following characteristics:

Physical node layout consistent with the case study.

Design supports all functional and non-functional requirements of the case study.

Communication protocols between nodes correctly identified.

 

All Distinction requirements plus:

Consistent with all other elements of the assignment.

Fully correct UML syntax

Clear and well-presented diagram.

 

 

 
ORDER THIS PAPER OR A SIMILAR ONE WITH PRO WRITING TUTORS AND GET AN AMAZING DISCOUNT"