Weaving a network of architectural knowledge

Navarro, Elena; Cuesta, Carlos E.; Perry, Dewayne E.

doi:10.1109/wicsa.2009.5290810

Cited by 4 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…3, these relationships were first defined on operationalizations, as they are in charge of describing both the DDs and the DRs, but they are also applicable to DesignAssets with identical semantics. An analysis was performed in [57], considering the existing relationships in other proposals, which finally led to the identification of the following relationships:…”

Section: Ak Relationships In Atrium Extensionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Having an excludes relationship from A to B, means that if A's design decision is made, it prevents B's design decision to be made. It was shown in [57] how the selection of these relationships provides us with the necessary expressiveness to cover most of the existing approaches in the area. This analysis is summarized in Table 2.…”

Section: Ak Relationships In Atrium Extensionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Antipatterns for Architectural Knowledge Management

Navarro

Cuesta

Perry

et al. 2013

Int. J. Info. Tech. Dec. Mak.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent research on Software Architecture has recovered its original emphasis on keeping track of design decisions and their rationales during software development, compiling them under the name of architectural knowledge (AK). This knowledge is composed of decision assets, which relate to each other creating a decision network structure. We argue that relationships in these networks of AK contain valuable information, in particular when they describe negative semantics. We use antipatterns to exploit and manage these negative relationships systematically. After examining and classifying the kinds of AK relationships, we describe a method that enriches this network by means of antipattern structures. To show the feasibility and suitability of this approach, we provide a proof-of-concept by applying it to an existing process, ATRIUM, with a concrete example, the Gas Station metaphor. Results of the use of the presented approach into three different projects with different complexities show both its feasibility and applicability.

show abstract

Section: Ak Relationships In Atrium Extensionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Ak Relationships In Atrium Extensionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Antipatterns for Architectural Knowledge Management

Navarro

Cuesta

Perry

et al. 2013

Int. J. Info. Tech. Dec. Mak.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The model in every frame describes the current architecture (configuration) and the relevant AK. In this example, the AK is structured; the names of the AK relationships from the decision tree have been taken from . Namely, the first frame (at time t ) depicts a configuration with two components (right oval), along with the decision tree , which led to this configuration.…”

Section: Proposal: Combining Evolution Styles With Architectural Knowmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There are several proposals in the literature: to a certain extent, the set of relationships is not as important as the structure (the network) they define , which could even constrain our future evolution. Nevertheless, for the remainder of the discussion, we will use the set that we ourselves described in and is also used in Figures and .…”

Section: Proposal: Combining Evolution Styles With Architectural Knowmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The reasons are specified as follows: ATRIUM provides explicit support for AK, as explained in . In fact, it has been extended to provide a very complex structure of AK in a simple way, using just three AK relationships . Therefore, it does support SAK and, in fact, has been explicitly chosen for the richness and detail of its SAK support. ATRIUM was specifically designed to support the development process from the requirements to the architectural stage .…”

Section: Proof Of Concept: Atrium For Evolutionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evolution styles: using architectural knowledge as an evolution driver

Cuesta

Navarro

Perry

et al. 2012

J Software Evolu Process

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Software evolution is an increasingly challenging and compelling concern for every developed software system because of the changes in the requirements, the technology, etc. When software evolution is carried out, software architecture emerges as one of the cornerstones that should be considered from two different points of view: as an artifact for the evolution, as it helps the architect plan and restructure the system, and as an artifact of the evolution, because it has to be modified as well. This paper focuses on the second point of view-that is, on the evolution of the software architecture, but taking into account architectural knowledge as a key driver of the process. Given that architecture rationale and design intent are critical in evolving software systems, it is imperative that they be captured in some useful form to aid that evolution process. We present a new approach for evolution styles that extends them by considering in their description the architectural knowledge as a valuable asset of the evolution process.

show abstract