Abstract
Descriptions of reactive systems focus heavily on behavioral aspects, often in terms of scenarios. To cope with the increasing complexity of services provided by these systems, behavioral aspects need to be handled early in the design process with flexible and concise notations as well as expressive concepts. UML offers different notations and concepts that can help describe such services. However, several necessary concepts appear to be absent from UML, but present in the Use Case Map (UCM) scenario notation. In particular, Use Case Maps allow scenarios to be mapped to different architectures composed of various component types. The notation supports structured and incremental development of complex scenarios at a high level of abstraction, as well as their integration. UCMs specify variations of run-time behavior and scenario structures through sub-maps “pluggable” into placeholders called stubs. This paper presents how UCM concepts could be used to extend the semantics and notations of UML for the modeling of complex reactive systems. Adding a “UCM view” to the existing UML views can help bridging the gap separating requirements and use cases from more detailed views (e.g. expressed with interaction diagrams and statechart diagrams). Examples from telecommunications systems are given and a corresponding design trajectory is also suggested.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Amyot, D. and Andrade, R.: “Description of Wireless Intelligent Network Services with Use Case Maps”. In: SBRC’99, 17th Brazilian Symposium on Computer Networks, Salvador, Brazil, May 1999.
Amyot, D., Buhr, R.J.A., Gray, T., and Logrippo, L.: “Use Case Maps for the Capture and Validation of Distributed Systems Requirements”. In: RE’99, Fourth IEEE International Symposium on Requirements Engineering, Limerick, Ireland, June 1999, pp. 44–53. http://www.usecasemaps.org/pub/re99.pdf
Amyot, D. and Logrippo, L.: “Use Case Maps and LOTOS for the Prototyping and Validation of a Mobile Group Call System”. In: Computer Communication, 23(12), May 2000, pp. 1135–1157. http://www.usecasemaps.org/pub/cc99.pdf
Amyot, D. and Miga, A.: Use Case Maps Document Type Definition 0.19. Working document, June 2000. http://www.usecasemaps.org/xml/
Bordeleau, F. and Buhr, R.J.A.: “The UCM-ROOM Design Method: from Use Case Maps to Communicating State Machines”. In: Conference on the Engineering of Computer-Based Systems, Monterey, USA, March 1997.http://www.UseCaseMaps.org/pub/UCM-ROOM.pdf
Bordeleau, F.: A Systematic and Traceable Progression from Scenario Models to Communi-cating Hierarchical Finite State Machines. Ph.D. thesis, SCS, Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada, August 1999. http://www.UseCaseMaps.org/pub/fb_phdthesis.pdf
Buhr, R.J.A. and Casselman, R.S.: Use Case Maps for Object-Oriented Systems, Prentice-Hall, USA, 1995. http://www.UseCaseMaps.org/pub/UCM_book95.pdf
Buhr, R.J.A.: “Use Case Maps as Architectural Entities for Complex Systems”. In: Transac-tions on Software Engineering, IEEE, December 1998, pp. 1131–1155. http://www.UseCaseMaps.org/pub/tse98final.pdf
Buhr, R.J.A., Amyot, D., Elammari, M., Quesnel, D., Gray, T., and Mankovski, S.: “High Level, Multi-agent Prototypes from a Scenario-Path Notation: A Feature-Interaction Exam-ple”. In: PAAM’98, 3rd Conf. on Practical Application of Intelligent Agents and Multi-Agents, London, UK, March 1998. http://www.UseCaseMaps.org/pub/4paam98.pdf
ISO, Information Processing Systems, OSI: LOTOS — A Formal Description Technique Based on the Temporal Ordering of Observational Behaviour. IS 8807, Geneva, 1989.
Miga, A.: Application of Use Case Maps to System Design with Tool Support. M.Eng. thesis, Dept. of Systems and Computer Engineering, Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada, October 1998. http://www.UseCaseMaps.org/tools/ucmnav/
Nakamura, M., Kikuno, T., Hassine, J., and Logrippo, L.: “Feature Interaction Filtering with Use Case Maps at Requirements Stage”. In: Sixth International Workshop on Feature Inter-actions in Telecommunications and Software Systems (FIW’00), Glasgow, Scotland, UK, May 2000. http://www.UseCaseMaps.org/pub/fiw00_filter.pdf
Object Management Group: Unified Modeling Language Specification, Version 1.3. June 1999. http://www.omg.org
Paech, B. “On the Role of Activity Diagrams in UML”. In: Int. Workshop, UML’98, pp. 267–277. http://www4.informatik.tu-muenchen.de/papers/Pae_UML98.html
Rumbaugh, J., Jacobson, I., and Booch, G.: The Unified Modeling Language Reference Manual. Addison Wesley, 1999.
Sales, I. and Probert, R.: “From High-Level Behaviour to High-Level Design: Use Case Maps to Specification and Description Language”. Submitted to SBRC’2000, 18th Brazilian Symposium on Computer Networks, Belo Horizonte, Brazil, May 2000.
Scratchley, W.C. and Woodside, C.M.: “Evaluating Concurrency Options in Software Specifications”. In: MASCOTS’99, Seventh International Symposium on Modelling, Analysis and Simulation of Computer and Telecommunication Systems, College Park, MD, USA, October 1999, pp. 330–338. http://www.UseCaseMaps.org/pub/mascots99.pdf
Selic, B.: Turning Clockwise: Using UML in the Real-Time Domain. In: Communications of the ACM, 42(10), October 1999, pp. 46–54.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2000 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Amyot, D., Mussbacher, G. (2000). On the Extension of UML with Use Case Maps Concepts. In: Evans, A., Kent, S., Selic, B. (eds) ≪UML≫ 2000 — The Unified Modeling Language. UML 2000. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 1939. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-40011-7_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-40011-7_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-41133-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-40011-0
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive