Cost, benefits and quality of software development documentation: A systematic mapping

Zhi, Junji; Garousi-Yusifoğlu, Vahid; Sun, Bo; Garousi, Golara; Shahnewaz, S. M.; Ruhe, Guenther

doi:10.1016/j.jss.2014.09.042

Cited by 90 publications

(87 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The potential threats are discussed in the context of the four types of threats to validity based on a standard checklist for validity threats presented in [70]: internal validity, construct validity, conclusion validity and external validity. In dealing and minimizing the potential threats to validity, we have also benefited from our experience in our recent SM and SLR studies [74,75,76,77].…”

Section: Limitations and Threats To Validitymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Challenges and best practices in industry-academia collaborations in software engineering: A systematic literature review

Garousi

Petersen

Özkan

2016

Information and Software Technology

Self Cite

193

182

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Limitations and Threats To Validitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Questions are answered according to a categorization scheme. For designing a good categorization scheme, we adapted a baseline classification from our recent SM and SLR studies [74,75,76,77], improved it with the goals of this SLR, and finalized the schema through an iterative improvement process.…”

Section: Limitations and Threats To Validitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Challenges and best practices in industry-academia collaborations in software engineering: A systematic literature review

Garousi

Petersen

Özkan

2016

Information and Software Technology

Self Cite

193

182

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…A recent systematic literature mapping in [53] however shows that there is very little work about the cost aspect of software documentation. Even less work is published that quantifies both the costs and benefits, or the return on investment of using software documentation.…”

Section: Cost-benefit Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

How organisation of architecture documentation affects architectural knowledge retrieval

Graaf¹,

Liang

Tang

et al. 2016

Science of Computer Programming

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A common approach to software architecture documentation in industry projects is the use of file-based documents. This approach offers a single-dimensional arrangement of the architectural knowledge. Knowledge retrieval from file-based architecture documentation is efficient if the organisation of knowledge supports the needs of the readers; otherwise it can be difficult. In this paper, we compare the organisation and retrieval of architectural knowledge in a file-based documentation approach and an ontologybased documentation approach. The ontology-based approach offers a multi-dimensional organisation of architectural knowledge by means of a software ontology and semantic wiki, whereas file-based documentation typically uses hierarchical organisation by directory structure and table of content. We conducted case studies in two companies to study the efficiency and effectiveness of retrieving architectural knowledge from the different organisations of knowledge. We found that the use of better knowledge organisation correlates with the efficiency and effectiveness of AK retrieval. Professionals who used the knowledge organisation found this beneficial.

show abstract

“…This is particularly true for requirements, where missing or deficient documentation may lead to developing the wrong product. On the one hand, proper documentation reduces the cost of software development by shortening the duration of tasks and reducing rework [2]. On the other hand, high quality documentation costs: it demands time and effort to create and maintain.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Our goal was to (1) examine the size and interconnectivity of documentation artifacts (and how these two factors affect the user interaction with such artifacts), (2) investigate the challenges related to information presentation that practitioners face when interacting with artifacts, and (3) explore what methods practitioners use to overcome the identified challenges and how effective they are.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Exploratory Study on User Interaction Challenges When Handling Interconnected Requirements Artifacts of Various Sizes

Ghazi

Glinz

2016

2016 IEEE 24th International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Requirements documentation is essential for developing software systems of non-trivial size. The cost of creating and maintaining documentation artifacts in terms of time and effort is significantly influenced by the tools with which engineers view, navigate and edit documentation artifacts. However, there is not much evidence about how well documentation tools actually support engineers, particularly when dealing with artifacts that are larger than the available display screen and with multiple artifacts at the same time. Therefore, we conducted an exploratory study based on 29 interviews with software practitioners to understand the current practice of presenting and manipulating artifacts in documentation tools, and how practitioners deal with the challenges encountered. Our study shows that a significant number of artifacts cannot be viewed entirely, even on large screens. Moreover, more than half of the participants use four or more artifacts concurrently. Nevertheless, current tools only provide primitive capabilities for handling concurrent and large artifacts, thus forcing engineers to create, for example, mental images of the currently used artifacts or use workarounds such as hanging printouts to the wall. Our results may trigger new research and help improve requirements engineering tools. Abstract-Requirements documentation is essential for developing software systems of non-trivial size. The cost of creating and maintaining documentation artifacts in terms of time and effort is significantly influenced by the tools with which engineers view, navigate and edit documentation artifacts. However, there is not much evidence about how well documentation tools actually support engineers, particularly when dealing with artifacts that are larger than the available display screen and with multiple artifacts at the same time. Therefore, we conducted an exploratory study based on 29 interviews with software practitioners to understand the current practice of presenting and manipulating artifacts in documentation tools, and how practitioners deal with the challenges encountered. Our study shows that a significant number of artifacts cannot be viewed entirely, even on large screens. Moreover, more than half of the participants use four or more artifacts concurrently. Nevertheless, current tools only provide primitive capabilities for handling concurrent and large artifacts, thus forcing engineers to create, for example, mental images of the currently used artifacts or use workarounds such as hanging printouts to the wall. Our results may trigger new research and help improve requirements engineering tools.

show abstract

Cost, benefits and quality of software development documentation: A systematic mapping

Cited by 90 publications

References 44 publications

Challenges and best practices in industry-academia collaborations in software engineering: A systematic literature review

Challenges and best practices in industry-academia collaborations in software engineering: A systematic literature review

How organisation of architecture documentation affects architectural knowledge retrieval

An Exploratory Study on User Interaction Challenges When Handling Interconnected Requirements Artifacts of Various Sizes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About