Addressing Consistency Checking of Goal Model for Software Product Line Government Tourism System
Abstract
Software Product Line Development needed inconsistency checking in order to improve software quality. In order to handle conflict (inconsistency) is one of active areas in the research of Goal Oriented Requirements Engineering (GORE). Ontology is used to capture the knowledge of certain domain wished. One of the features of Ontology described using OWL is the checking of consistency. The case study is Indonesian Government Tourism System.
This paper presents how to develop software product line in Indonesian Government with the Ontology OWL that used for the consistency checking in the software product line for e-government applications. It is important, because the software product line would be derived from goal model that has been consistent and no conflict These paper presents how the Ontology OWL act to handle inconsistency checking in goal model. The first step conducted is to convert the goal model into Ontology using Protégé. Parallel with the first step, Ontology with equipped carried out the checking consistency of terminology, designation, and structure. The next step is to conduct the checking of logic consistency (Strong conflict and/or Weak conflict) by defining the rules using SWRL Tab.
References
[2] Budiardjo, E.K., Ahmad, N.F., Zainal, A.H. (2013). ZEF Framework on E-Government Applications: Featuring SOA and BPM Alignment, International Journal Computer Theory and Engineering, 5(2): 366-376.
[3] Donzelli, P. and Bresciani, P. (2003). Goal Oriented requirements Engineering: a case Study in eGovernment, Proceedings of the 15th Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering (CAISE’03), Klagenfurt, Austria, 16-20 June, Austria.
[4] Fajar, A.N., Eko, K.B. and Zainal, A.H. (2014). R2FM Method for Requirement Analysis in Software Product Line for E-Government Applications, IPCT, Rome, Italy.
[5] Fajar, A.N., Eko, K.B. and Zainal, A.H. (2012). System Architecture in Dynamic Environment based on Commonality and Variability Business Processes, 8th ICCM Seoul, IEEE.
[6] Lapouchnian, A. (2005). Goal-Oriented Requirements Engineering: An Overview of the Current Research, Department of Computer Science University of Toronto, Canada.
[7] Nair, T.R.G. and Suma, V. (2010). The Pattern of Software Defects Spann in Across Size Complexity, International Journal of Software Engineering, 3(2): 53-70.
[8] Nuseibeh, B., Easterbrook, S. (2000). Requirements Engineering: A Roadmap”. Proc. Conference on the Future of Software Engineering. ICSE '00 Proceedings of the Conference on The Future of Software Engineering, Limerick, Ireland, Pages 35-46
[9] Pohl, K., Guinter, B. and Frank, V.L. (2005). Software Product Line Engineering, Foundations, Principles, and Techniques, Springer Verlag.
[10] Serrano, M.A., Gomez-Romero, J., Patricio, M.A., Garcıa, J., Molina, J.M. (2012). Ontological representation of time-of-flight camera data to support vision-based AmI. 4th International Workshop on Sensor Networks and Ambient Intelligence, Lugano (23 March 2012).
[11] Shofi, IM, Budiardjo, E.K. (2012). Addressing OWL Ontology for Goal Consistency Checking, The 14th International Conference on Information Integration and Web-based Applications & Services (iiWAS), 3 - 5 Desember 2012, Sanur, Indonesia
*** research-insights/index.html
Keywords
Copyright© 2024 The Author(s). Published by ASERS Publishing 2024. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of CC-BY 4.0 license.