J. Krogstie. UML and the unified process, Idea Group Publishing, Hershey, PA, USA, (2003)
Zusammenfassung
Many researchers have evaluated different parts of UMLTM and have come up with suggestions for improvements to different parts of the language. This chapter looks at UML (version 1.4) as a whole, and contains an overview evaluation of UML and how it is described in the OMGTM standard. The evaluation is done using a general framework for understanding quality of models and modeling languages in the information systems field. The evaluation is based on both practical experiences and more theoretical evaluations of UML. Based on the evaluation, we conclude that although being an improvement over it is predecessors, UML still has many limitations and deficiencies, both related to the expressiveness and comprehensibility of the language. Although work is well underway for the next version of UML (version 2.0), not all of the important problems seem to be addressed in the upcoming new version of the language.
%0 Book Section
%1 krogstie03
%A Krogstie, John
%B UML and the unified process
%C Hershey, PA, USA
%D 2003
%I Idea Group Publishing
%K modeling uml quality
%P 1--22
%T Evaluating UML using a generic quality framework
%U http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=953192.953194
%X Many researchers have evaluated different parts of UMLTM and have come up with suggestions for improvements to different parts of the language. This chapter looks at UML (version 1.4) as a whole, and contains an overview evaluation of UML and how it is described in the OMGTM standard. The evaluation is done using a general framework for understanding quality of models and modeling languages in the information systems field. The evaluation is based on both practical experiences and more theoretical evaluations of UML. Based on the evaluation, we conclude that although being an improvement over it is predecessors, UML still has many limitations and deficiencies, both related to the expressiveness and comprehensibility of the language. Although work is well underway for the next version of UML (version 2.0), not all of the important problems seem to be addressed in the upcoming new version of the language.
%@ 1931777446
@incollection{krogstie03,
abstract = {Many researchers have evaluated different parts of UMLTM and have come up with suggestions for improvements to different parts of the language. This chapter looks at UML (version 1.4) as a whole, and contains an overview evaluation of UML and how it is described in the OMGTM standard. The evaluation is done using a general framework for understanding quality of models and modeling languages in the information systems field. The evaluation is based on both practical experiences and more theoretical evaluations of UML. Based on the evaluation, we conclude that although being an improvement over it is predecessors, UML still has many limitations and deficiencies, both related to the expressiveness and comprehensibility of the language. Although work is well underway for the next version of UML (version 2.0), not all of the important problems seem to be addressed in the upcoming new version of the language.},
added-at = {2006-03-24T16:34:33.000+0100},
address = {Hershey, PA, USA},
author = {Krogstie, John},
biburl = {https://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/26a1c668d3c5ffec00b24c0508d73a4c1/neilernst},
booktitle = {UML and the unified process},
citeulike-article-id = {530915},
description = {sdasda},
interhash = {b9b109c0728a4cdab8b1627f3167e5b6},
intrahash = {6a1c668d3c5ffec00b24c0508d73a4c1},
isbn = {1931777446},
keywords = {modeling uml quality},
pages = {1--22},
priority = {4},
publisher = {Idea Group Publishing},
timestamp = {2006-03-24T16:34:33.000+0100},
title = {Evaluating UML using a generic quality framework},
url = {http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=953192.953194},
year = 2003
}